Senate Proceeding on Aug 5th, 2009 :: 3:28:40 to 3:35:25
Total video length: 5 hours 41 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:102 Duration: 0:06:45 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

3:28:30 to 3:28:50( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: colleague and friend from ka object mr. dodd: i thanks my friend. mr. roberts: mr. president, i rise today to express my considered opposition to judge sonia sotomayor's nomination to the united states supreme court. as u.s. senators i think w know we have an obligation to

3:28:40 to 3:35:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Pat Roberts

3:28:51 to 3:29:12( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: ensure that our courts are filled with qualified and impartial -- impartial -- judges. while judge sotomayor has an impressive resume -- that's given -- i personal judgments and views will impact her judicial decisions. in addition, i find some o her rulings very troubling.

3:29:13 to 3:29:33( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: during the senate's debate on the john roberts, then-senator obama stated -- and i quote -- "while adherence to legal precedent and rules of statutory construction will

3:29:34 to 3:29:54( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: of the cases that come before the court so that both a scalia or ginsburg will same place most of the time on those 95% of the cases, what matters on the s said those 5% of cases that are truly

3:29:55 to 3:30:16( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: difficult. in those cases," he said, "adherence to precedent a rules will only get the 25th of a legal mayor a on this. that last mile can only be determined," he said, "on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, once's broader perspectives on how the

3:30:17 to 3:30:37( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: world works and the depth and breadth of the entrance of the empathy issue to this debate. i i respectfully does agree with now president obama. our judges must decide all cases in adherence to legal precedent and rules

3:30:38 to 3:30:59( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: constitutional construction. it doesn't mean if they do that, th the don't have empathy. i would everybody would agree -- everybody on the supreme court has empathy. but the role of a judge is not to rule based on his or her own personal judgments but to adhere to the laws as they are written. while judge sotomayor stated

3:31:00 to 3:31:20( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: during her confirmation hearing that -- quote -- "it is not the heart that compels conclions in cases, it is the law," i still have concernsegarding her ability to remain impartial. she has made some statements in law review articles and speeches that are of serious concern. i am not convinced that judge

3:31:21 to 3:31:42( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: sotomayor will set aside her personal judgments and views. while on the second circuit court of appeals, judge sotomayor joined a four-paragraph ruling, mr. president, on property rights. in didden v. village of port chester, the appellate's claim

3:31:43 to 3:32:06( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: that a developer demanded $800,000 in order to avoid condemnation of the property by the city. when the pay the $800,000, they received a petition to initiate condemnation. although the second court -- although the second court --

3:32:07 to 3:32:27( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: excuse me, mr. president. although the second court of appeals dismissed the case, it was noted that relief could not be granted based on the u.s. supreme court's decision in kelo v. the city of new londo london. now, that four-paragraph ruling didn't even provide an analysis as to how the kelo ruling applied to hand.

3:32:28 to 3:32:49( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: in fact, the kelo decision acknowledges that a city no doubt would be forbidden. while on court of appeals, judge sotomayor joined a four-paragraph property rights and, as i've indicated in that story, the appellates claimed that a

3:32:50 to 3:33:11( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: developer demanded $800,000 to avoid the condemnation. when they refused, they received a pition to initiate condemnation. and although the second court basically ruled that way in regards from taking land for the purpose of conferring a private benefit on a particular private

3:33:12 to 3:33:33( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: party, that was the decision the pour-paragraph ruling in didden is very troubling n. kansas, land is -- very troubling. in kansas, land is gold. farmland is platinum. we have a healthy respect for property rights in middle america. it also bothers me that a court could make a broad statement without analyzing and applying the facts to case law.

3:33:34 to 3:33:56( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: turning to firearm rights, judge sotomayor joined an opinion ruling that the second amendment is not a fundamental right and, therefore, does not apply to state and local it is likely that at some point, the second amendment's application to states could be argued before the supreme court. that could come very quickly. i would certainly hope that should this matter be argued

3:33:57 to 3:34:17( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: before the supreme court, judge sotomayor would recuse herself. however, in her testimony in regards to hearings, she indicated that she saw no reason to recuse herself in any decision. that was not, however, the statements that were made at their nomination hearings by judges alito and roberts.

3:34:18 to 3:34:38( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: mr. president, i do not discount the fact that judge sotomayor is a very accomplished judge and has extensive -- an extensive judicial record. however, some of her statements, writings and rulings also really concern me. they indicate that her personal judgments and

3:34:39 to 3:35:00( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: her judicial decisions. we have a constitutional obligation to ensure that our judges are impartial and faithful to the law. during chief justice john roberts' confirmatn hearing, he noted that judges and justices are servants of the law law, not the other way around. judges are like umpires. umpires don't make the rules.

3:35:01 to 3:35:22( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: they apply them. the role of an umpire and judge is critical. they make sure everybody plays by the rules, not by empathy. but it is a limited role. nobody ever went to a ball game to see an umpire. i am not convinced that judge sotomayor will be an umpire and

3:35:23 to 3:35:25( Edit History Discussion )

Pat Roberts: will consistently adhere to the rule of law as opposed to