In her opening statement, which concluded the proceedings, Sonia Sotomayor anticipated the criticisms of her "judicial philosophy" from conservatives, and tailored her response accordingly:
In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress’s intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand.
The process of judging is enhanced when the arguments and concerns of the parties to the litigation are understood and acknowledged. That is why I generally structure my opinions by setting out what the law requires and then by explaining why a contrary position, sympathetic or not, is accepted or rejected. That is how I seek to strengthen both the rule of law and faith in the impartiality of our justice system. My personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.
Sotomayor's comments were always about how life experience might affect a judge's perspective--and how that can be both a problem and an asset, depending on a judge's ability to recognize where their own perspective ends and the law begins. If Sotomayor was rattled by Republican senators alleging that this means she allows racial prejduice to influence her rulings, she didn't show it--but there's still ample opportunity for them to try and throw her off her game.
In the press conference after the hearing, Jeff Sessions said that "if that was the theme of her speeches over the last few years we'd have less of a difficulty with her nomination than we do." It might help if he read the entire speech.
-- A. Serwer
