Senate GOP's Reaction To Sotomayor Hearings: We'll Have To Review 76 Cases Per Day
The Senate Republican Communications Center has put out a new objection to the scheduled hearings for Sonia Sotomayor: That this schedule represents a double standard compared to the time it took for John Roberts' hearings to begin, because it means Republicans will have to review 76 of her cases per day, beginning from the day when the nomination was announced, to be ready on the day the hearings are supposed to begin.
The key here is that Sotomayor has spent a lot longer on the bench than Roberts did. Roberts had a total of 327 cases, to be reviewed in 55 days before his hearings -- about six per day. Sotomayor has 3,625 cases, to be reviewed in 48 days, working out to a ratio of about 76.
Now hold on a second, the math can get even trickier from here.
I did some number-crunching, and it turns out that in order to get to the same per-case ratio as Roberts, then the hearings would have to start 610 days after the initial nomination -- or a year and half from the current scheduled date. If we waited for September, which Republicans have called for, that would bring the ratio down to about 34 cases reviewed per day.
So how long do Republicans want?
"I think a lot of people on both sides of the aisle have acknowledged that Senate Republicans have approached this process in a very fair way," said Senate Republican Communications Center spokesman John Ashbrook, in a phone call with TPM. "And from the beginning we've been asking for one thing really, and that's an opportunity to review the record in a thorough way. And I think a lot of Democrats have agreed with us."
I asked again what ratio they'd be looking for. "A thorough review is what we're looking for," Ashbrook explained. "Putting a number on it is not as important as opportunity to throughly review the record."
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
So basically now she's over-qualified by her time as a judge.
June 9, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nine years ago, standards were a lot higher in Washington. After Bush et al, I may be overqualified to be on the SCOTUS. And not only am I not a lawyer but I don't even watch them on TV.
June 9, 2009 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is okay, but only if they're willing to take a test to see if they've actually read all 3625 cases.
June 9, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
They should also be made to compare and contrast certain of the cases in essay form on the spot, of course.
June 9, 2009 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP seem to be doing so much damage to their image with their racist bullshit that I wonder why they don't want to just get it over with.
June 9, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I may be willing to settle for a test to see if they've read the constitution. Not even all of it, we can stick to only the high profile amendments.
June 9, 2009 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
They don't read the bills they vote on, and they sure as hell aren't going to bother reading Sotomayor's legal opinions. We already know they haven't read the Constitution either, or they wouldn't have stood next to Bush while they were pissing on it for eight years.
The real question is: what DO Republican Senators read besides poll numbers and the numbers on checks from contributors? The ONLY reason they want to drag out the inevitable is so they can raise more money by demonizing a judge whom they're never going to vote for anyway.
June 9, 2009 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read? Oh hell no. They hire people to do that for them. Well, unless their is a camera nearby, in which case they can usually find some piece of paper in their suit to read off of.
June 10, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think they even read poll numbers, to be honest. If they did, they'd have stopped their childish antics about eight months ago. But they've only ratcheted them up.
It seems plain that the only things they do read are the numbers on the checks. That, they can still rely on (at least to the extent that Big Pharma, Big Banking and Big Insurance are not now lining the coffers of Democrats.)
June 11, 2009 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good one---Only the 'aides' read and write the information and legislation! The Senate has over 20,000 sq ft of office space per senator!!!!It is filled with minions doing their work for them! Then you go to the gallery and there are less than 30 members on the floor UNLESS there is press there!
Stupid Stupid Repubs---but maybe the Dems will get some courage and push this to a conclusion on a reasonable time frame!
June 10, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congress is complaining to the American people about doing the work they were elected to do?
June 9, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. The Senate is obstructionist.
June 9, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Party of No is so weak they can't even make "No" work. All they got left is trying to slow down the change that's coming.
The Party of No = The Party of Slow
June 9, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds to me that the Republicans are just a bunch of whiners. They are offering no concrete reason for a delay, just complaints.
June 9, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just for proof, I Googled "Democrat and whiners" and got 105k hits. "Republican and whiners" generated 392k!
Yep.
June 9, 2009 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
When they say it's not about sex, it's about sex. When they say it's not about delaying her appointment as long as possible, it's about. . . . . I would hope the Dems would conduct the hearing as scheduled, and pursue a vote. They really, in my view, have nothing to lose. Let the chips fall wherever. Those against or concerned about her confirmation will continue to be opposed.
June 9, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well this makes perfect sense.
To a ReThuglican, a good judge is a judge without a track record. Can you say "Clarence Thomas"?
June 9, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't Reid cave to McConnell and give them a HUGE congressional staff ratio after the election? Sounds like a good way to put them to use.
June 9, 2009 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who cares what they say? They don't have the votes to do anything.
June 9, 2009 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
They take the position that every stone must be turned over, looking for one piece of ammo against her confirmation.
It might be reasonable to look at her 380 Appeals Court opinions. If a legal beagle staffer for each Repo in Congress reviews one case per day, writes a summary report, ... they could be done in two days leaving plenty of time for committee hearings and golf. It's a simple matter of "manpower" application.
June 9, 2009 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see why the have to review EVERY case, do you?
June 9, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
... they ...
June 9, 2009 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because they are looking for a smoking gun, and it might be hidden in any line of any of 3K case files... just like the WMDs in Iraq.
Of course I agree that with 3K cases, it's not the rare odd case which counts, but the general track record shown. The Repos want to pretend they can call for 0% tolerance when it's not their candidate.
June 9, 2009 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is hypocrisy that is simply breathtaking in its absurdity. They'd take 600+ days, which ain't going to happen, and then they'd filibuster her anyway. Oh, for that bi-partisanship and that up-or-down vote they loved/love to bruit about.
Of course her leg will have healed by then and she could kick the crap out of them from one end of Constitution Ave. to the other. Sooner rather than later...
June 9, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weak.
June 9, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
This from the same ass-holes who voted for the Patriot Act without ever even reading it?
June 9, 2009 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
On Sam Alito, Jeff Sessions told the Philadelphia Inquirer in November, 2005. "You don't have to read everything he's written."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/02/sessions-on-alito-we-dont_n_210211.html
June 9, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the longer you've worked the more vetting you need. Instead of experience being a good thing, it's suspicious and requires exponentially more vetting.
Up is down. Let's just appoint people with no judging experience at all. Vet em in half an hour.
June 9, 2009 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
No problem. I think there's 9 Republicans on the Judiciary Committee. Just have them divide up those 3,000 decisions, making a bit more than 300 per Senator/staff. No problem.
June 9, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even 76 per day should be no prob. Surely the Regent University Law School had more than 76 grads just a few days ago, and they've got to be kept busy somehow.
June 9, 2009 11:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, what they are saying is that essentially, they are assigning one person to review all her stuff, and that one geek can't possibly do that many cases per day? Who are they kidding?
I mean, did they check their common sense at the door? Do they not have enormous resources that had already anticipated her and started the ball rolling?
They could divide the job and finish in a day. OK, a week so that they could bring up the cases that they want to go to bat over. If they had not already reviewed her case history, why did they have so many objections to her nomination in the first place?
June 9, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Folks on the other side of the aisle agree that they're being reasonable? Really? Which folks? Can they name names? Or is this just, as we all suspect, more horse manure from the G.O.P.?
June 9, 2009 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think they're being perfectly fair. By their logic, Harriet Miers, who spent no time on the bench, should have been confirmed as a supreme court justice after an hour or two of deliberation. Maybe Obama should nominate Miers instead so he can get her on the bench quickly?
June 9, 2009 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
SInce we're talking about Supreme Court nominees here, here is my theory I'll throw out so you all can remember you heard it here first, and forget about it if it never happens.
Elena Kagan is being positioned as the unsinkable nominee should Obama have to replace one of Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Roberts or Kennedy.
That will be a helluva fight from the Conservatives, so the nominee will have to be bullet proof. The SG is also referred to as the 10th Justice afterall, and if Ms. Kagan has 2-3 years there, along with her career in Academia working across the political spectrum without any case history that could drag her down, and an intellectual heavyweight she'd be hard to block/filibuster.
June 9, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus, Republicans read slower than Democrats, so we'll have to spot them a year or two for that. Consenteratin's hard werk!
June 9, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well golly, here's a neat idea. Round up twenty of those weasally little Greg Marmelarde clone staffers with law degrees, tell them each to read, oh, five casea a day, flag the one in ten that they think contains language that can be distorted into supporting whatever smear the strategerizers have settled on, pass those up to a second review layer of, oh, maybe five more senior staffers, then let them pick the ten or fifteen that they actually want the Goposaur senators to look at.
Oh, wait, that's what you were going to do already, wasn't it you transparently mendacious pukes?
June 9, 2009 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keeping her off the bench as long as possible to keep the now 5-3 con ratio works for them.
GOP: the New American Insurgency
nothing to offer but nothing
June 9, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obstruction is exactly what the GOP is about now. With Sotomayor, with Franken.
They've got nothing but their base, driven like sheep by Limbaugh and FOX.
I do wonder, though, if the right's call for a GM boycott will be something akin to McCarthy's going up against the Army.
June 9, 2009 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
to quote Col. Potter "Mule Fritters!"
These people are not going to play ball, so lets stop throwing it to them. Lets make them run around and make them find the meetings etc.. Turn it upside down for a week or two and then throw them the ball, if they can catch it....
June 9, 2009 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man, the GOP is spiraling out of control.
Joe Scarborough is trying to get the GOP back on track by telling them to focus on things like state's rights. The problem he has with this, is he doesn't always agree with states' rights.
Check out the clip.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=1692
June 9, 2009 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man! There needs to be a stock answer for the empty BS about every subject that comes from the idealess right. We daily reprove there obstuctionism, dishonesty & ignorance. It's called beating a dead horse (or elephant). We could insert their comments & our responses into almost any issue. While it is pretty damn fun watching these goobers implode, we've got to focus the majority of our energy on the important matters. We're still in Iraq, going big in Afghanistan, our representatives aren't really representing, etc. etc. Health care for sure is more important. How 'bout energy independence?
Finally, google should be what the right is all out against. They are disproven before a day ends & their revisionist history doesn't stand a chance. See Newt for one example.
June 9, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You all seem to be assuming that Sotomayor should be confirmed. If I had to bet, I'd bet Sotomayor is a Souter in reverse: comes in as a dem, goes out as a repug, and in between votes down Roe v. Wade. I haven't read all of her decisions or even most of them, but those I have read suggest a conservative viewpoint, at least on those issues of most concern to progressives. Be careful what you wish for.
June 9, 2009 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
DON'T ASK US FOR A TIMELINE! IF WE GIVE YOU A TIMELINE, THE ACTIVISTS WIN!
Jeezus, what is it with these guys and deadlines?
June 10, 2009 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
PERFECT
June 10, 2009 12:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
(Slow, sarcastic clap)
Oh, Bravo.
June 10, 2009 12:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
By the time the Senate GOP discovered it lacked the reading comprehension skills it needs to review Judge Sotomayor's record in a timely manner, it is too late.
So much for leaving no "child" behind.
June 10, 2009 2:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
They should try it without moving their lips. Oh wait . . .
June 10, 2009 5:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
The gist of it is:
They're no longer the party in power, it's not their president offering the nomination, the smear campaign didn't work so they whine and pout and talk about how unfair it all is.
If the situation were reversed, and Democrats wanted to review cases and postpone the hearings, Republicans would be shouting "Obstructionism! She (though it would probably be a he) deserves an up or down vote!"
The GOP: Hypocrisy in Action
June 10, 2009 7:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well....
Roberts IS the Chief Justice, so he needed a little extra scrutiny. Perhaps we can compromise:
you guys talk him into resigning, and we can extend the time on this nomination.
June 10, 2009 7:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mitch not only is a dork, he really looks like a dork. Love the picture !
June 10, 2009 7:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, the only criteria for Justices appointed by Republicans is being a Nazi, so the idea of a SCOTUS appointee with an actual resume is a little much for Republicans to handle.
June 10, 2009 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink