Graham Decried Guilt By Association With Ginsburg, Alito But Not Sotomayor

One of the most memorable moments from Judge Sonia Sotomayor's second day of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday was the aggressive line of questioning from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C).

It was a performance filled with uncomfortable moments and, as Graham's critics allege, political contradictions.

The South Carolina Republican demanded to know if President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court had a "temperament problem." It was an odd observation for Graham to make, according to several political observers, considering that Graham's best friend in the Senate -- the man for whom he worked tirelessly to get elected president -- Sen. John McCain is notorious for having a short fuse.

At another point, the senator asked Sotomayor to recite her now infamous "wise Latina" comment, claiming that he could not find the piece of paper on which he had written down the quotation. Democrats saw a blatant gambit for trying to create an embarrassing "YouTube moment" for Sotomayor.

The senator even told Sotomayor she had a reputation as a bully.

Although years earlier, when he was questioning Judge Samuel Alito during his Supreme Court nomination hearing, Graham had been incredulous that anyone would turn the Bush-nominee's personality into a political issue.

Finally, Graham made hay out of Sotomayor tenure on the board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, a legal arm for the Hispanic community that has been made into a boogeyman of legal liberalism by the judge's critics.

"Are you familiar with the position that the fund took regarding taxpayer-funded abortion? The briefs they filed?" Graham asked.

Story continues below

advertisement

Sotomayor noted that she "never reviewed those briefs."

"Well, in their briefs, they argued, and I will submit the quotes to you, that if you deny a low-income woman Medicaid funding, taxpayer funds, to have an abortion, if you deny her that, that's a form of slavery," Graham said. "Do you agree with that?"

"I wasn't aware of what was said in those briefs," Sotomayor said once more.

It was reflective of the line of questioning that Republicans on the Judiciary Committee pushed all day. But for Graham, the use of the PRLDF as a foil for Sotomayor, which he used that day before during an interview on Fox News, -- was a far more aggressive posture than what he had adopted with Alito. And it differed even more from how he approached the nomination of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The Clinton-appointee to the court, Graham once argued, shouldn't be judged based on the work she did for the ACLU, even though the civil liberties group pursued cases that he himself viewed as abhorrent.

As pointed out by a Democrat working on the Sotomayor nomination, here is a snippet of Graham's opening statement from Alito's confirmation hearing in 2006, in which he decries the guilt-by-association game played with Supreme Court nominees.

What is the proper role of a Senator when it comes to advising and consenting? I would argue that if we start taking the one or two cases we cherish the most and make that a litmus test, we have let our country down and we have changed the historical standard. Justice Ginsburg was the general counsel for the ACLU. If I am going to base my decision based on who you represented as a lawyer, how in the world could I ever vote for somebody that represented the ACLU? If I am going to make my decision based on whether or not I agree with the Princeton faculty and administration policies on ROTC students and quotas and I am bound by that, I will get killed at home. What Princeton does with their admission policies and whether or not a ROTC unit should be on a campus is an OK thing to debate; at least I hope it is OK. I think most Americans are going to be with the group that you are associated with, not the policies of Princeton. The bottom line is you come here as an individual with a life well lived. Everybody who seems to have worked with you as a private lawyer, public lawyer and as a judge admires you, even though they may disagree with you.

Watch:

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[onepotatotwopotato]

Questions for judge Sotomayor:

Do you believe that the Bill of Rights in its entirety, the first ten Amendments to our Constitution, is incorporated against the States by the Fourteenth or any other Amendment to the Constitution or by any other binding legal precedent?

Do you accept the finding of the Court in the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) that the rights of all citizens of the United States include but are not limited to the following, as redacted from the decision of the Court:

"the right to enter every State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, AND TO KEEP AND CARRY ARMS WHEREVER THEY WENT." [emphasis added]

The Court was of course enumerating rights it deemed could be denied to Black Americans. Today those and other rights must be applied equally to all citizens of the United States.

[outnow]

We all know of Linsey's support of torture, so we know what his view of the law is there. The Suprme Court has overturned many legislative agendas which he himself supported. His views on temperment are pretty much irrelevant considering his snide demeanor so all he can attack on is rascism. That would be the pot calling the kettle black. There is much more in Linsey's background I would suppose about that if he is anything like his pal, Jeff.

By Linsey's reasoning no minorities or women could be on the bench least they would be prejudiced in favor of their own race or gender. Only Clarence Thomas types would be permitted. Kind of an Uncles Tom's Cabin vetting process by good ole boys - white of course! No wise Latinas..... The nominee woulod have to reject even the Democratic party to prove it. A catch 22-situation.

[Bude]

What's good for the goose, is good for the goose droppings.

[onepotatotwopotato]

Unfortunately, Judge Sotomayor's judicial record and testimony clearly demonstrate a hostile view of the Second Amendment and the fundamental right of self-defense guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

It is only by ignoring history that any judge can say that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states. The one part of the Bill of Rights that Congress clearly intended to apply to all Americans in passing the Fourteenth Amendment was the Second Amendment. History and congressional debate are clear on this point.

Yet Judge Sotomayor seems to believe that the Second Amendment is limited only to the residents of federal enclaves such as Washington, D.C. and does not protect all Americans living in every corner of this nation. In her Maloney opinion and during the confirmation hearings, she deliberately misread Supreme Court precedent to support her incorrect view.

In last year's historic Heller decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees the individual's right to own firearms and recognizes the inherent right of self-defense. In addition, the Court required lower courts to apply the Twentieth Century cases it has used to incorporate a majority of the Bill of Rights to the States. Yet in her Maloney opinion, Judge Sotomayor dismissed that requirement, mistakenly relying instead on Nineteenth Century jurisprudence to hold that the Second Amendment does not apply to the States.

[isisdawnra]

NOTHING is beneath the linz

[phoebie]

Graham's "unless you have a complete meltdown, you will be confirmed" declaration in opening hearing statements smelled like Palin's "Can I call you Joe?" set up. The next day, after confronting Judge Sotomayor on rumored temperment problems, Graham was salivating. He could not wait for her to get steamed and then hit her with "Say it ain't so, Sonja".

[henrypapillon]

Well, that's different WE'RE throwing the stones now !

[Osusuki]

In the words of Glen Beck, "Was there ever a time when Lindsey Graham wasn't a worm?"

[Bude]

I normally believe the opposite of what Glenn Beck says.

[fodel]

Could this guy possibly be more arrogant and condescending? Just google "Lindsey Graham + a-hole" to get the goods on this two faced pug.

[rf dude]

Lindsey, eh?

Yer mamma wanted a(nother) daughter??
--

[somsoc]

Graham would defend all levels of b i g o t r y practiced by white males as long as it suited his purposes.

[greenberetcpt]

Senator Graham needs to be removed from office as a result of a get out the vote effort in South Carolina. He, Sessions and Kyl are people who should not be re-elected to the senate. The fact they repeat the same item over and over shows they don't have legitimate points against this great judge. Why are they afraid of her?

I hope the republican party reaps the appropriate reward during future elections for the efforts they putting forth against the judge, who happens to be hispanic.

[mjeffn]

Good luck with that. They're still fighting the Civil War.

[2bsure]

"The senator even told Sotomayor she had a reputation as a bully."

Ah, poor, poor Lindsey. He probably had many encounters with bullies growin' up.

[somsoc]

In the JAGC he has had a much less than stellar career. His trial work was pitiful and he never achieved defense level certification.

[TorontoNDP]

Wow, GOP hypocrisy?!? Like fish in a barrel.

[bannorhill]

Almost as bad a the Democrats.

[AndyB62]

What do you expect from a guy who represents a state with the confederate stars and bars on its flag?

[dwedge]

There was a time when I thought Strom Thurmond was the worst politician that South Carolina could ever produce. Graham demonstrates how wrong I was at every opportunity.

[Pammy2]

And there's also DeMint & Sanford! It's like a trifecta. Only when you hit it, you lose. You lose big time.