WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today announced he will oppose the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The following are excerpts from remarks he delivered on the Senate floor:
“In evaluating a nominee, it’s important that the Senate examine all aspects of the individual’s career and his or her merits as a judge, and not make judgments on the basis of gender or ethnicity. It starts with a judge’s decisions and opinions. Also important to understanding what an individual really thinks about things are speeches, writings, and associations.”
“Judge Sotomayor’s most widely-known speech is, of course, her ‘wise Latina woman’ speech, given in various fora over the years. It’s clear that the often-quoted phrase is not just a comment out of context, but is the essence of the speeches.’”
“Her attempt to re-characterize these speeches at the committee hearing strained credulity. I will address this issue at greater length during the confirmation debate, but suffice it to say, I remain unconvinced that Judge Sotomayor believes judges should set aside biases, including those based on race and gender, and render the law impartially and neutrally.”
“Unfortunately, I have not been persuaded that Judge Sotomayor is absolutely committed to setting aside her biases and impartially deciding cases based upon the rule of law. And I cannot ignore her unwillingness to answer Senators’ questions straightforwardly. For these reasons, I oppose her nomination.”
Foreign Law
“…Judge Sotomayor inferred that foreign law should be used, but then later testified it shouldn’t.... The central point is, of course, that it’s completely irrelevant to consider foreign law in U.S. courts. I don’t believe Judge Sotomayor is sufficiently committed to this principle.”
SCOTUS Reversals
“The U.S. Supreme Court has reviewed directly ten of her decisions – eight of those decisions have been reversed or vacated, another sharply criticized, and one upheld in a 5-4 decision.”
Ricci v. DeStefano
“In my view, the most astounding thing about the case was not the incorrect outcome reached by Judge Sotomayor’s court—it was that she rejected the firefighters’ claims in a mere one paragraph opinion and that she continued to maintain in the hearings that she was bound by precedent that the Supreme Court said didn’t exist.”
“…Judge Sotomayor’s court, instead, disposed of the case in an unsigned and unpublished opinion that contained zero – and I do mean zero – analysis.”
“Judge Sotomayor was asked about her Ricci decision at length during the confirmation hearing. Her defense, that she was just following “established Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedent,” as I said, is belied by the Supreme Court’s opinion noting ‘few, if any’ circuit court opinions addressing the issue.”
“When I pressed Judge Sotomayor to identify those controlling Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedents that allegedly dictated the outcome in Ricci, she dissembled and ran out the clock. Her ‘answers’ answered nothing and, in my opinion, violated her obligation to be forthcoming with the Judiciary Committee.”
Maloney v. Cuomo
“I am also concerned about Judge Sotomayor’s analysis – or lack thereof – in Maloney v. Cuomo, a Second Amendment case that could find its way to the Supreme Court next year…[I]f Judge Sotomayor’s decision were allowed to stand as precedent, then states will, ironically, be able to do what the federal District of Columbia cannot – place a de facto prohibition on the ownership of guns and other arms.”
