Senate Proceeding on Aug 5th, 2009 :: 4:36:10 to 4:49:00
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:24 Duration: 0:12:50 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

4:36:10 to 4:36:30( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: quorum call: mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new york is recognized. mr consent the call of the quorum be dispensed. .the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. i rise today in wholehearted support of the historic nomination of judge sotomayor to become an associate justice of

4:36:10 to 4:49:00( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Charles Schumer

4:36:31 to 4:36:52( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: the united states supreme court. i have two words to summarize my feelings about this nomination: it's time. it's time we have a nominee to the supreme court whose record has proven to be truly mainstream. it's time we have a nominee with practical experience in all

4:36:53 to 4:37:13( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: levels of the justice system whose upbringin housing project, whose experience as a plr prosecutor and judge has enabled her to see as she said in her statement "the human consequences" of her decisions. and it's time we have a nominee who is hispanic, a member of the

4:37:14 to 4:37:34( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: fastest growing population in america. finally, frank discussion about what is really preventing so many colleagues the aisle if supporting sotomayor. so in short this is time -- in

4:37:35 to 4:37:55( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: short, this is the time. and it's time. it's time we have a moderate nomie. it's time we have someone with a great fam an american family history. it's time we confirm the first hispanic justice to states supreme court. so let's start with judge sotomayor's record which is most

4:37:56 to 4:38:16( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: important. several of my republican colleagues said as they cast their votes against her in the judiciary committee that they did not know what kind of supreme court justice they might be getting in judge i find this conclusion to confounding. judge sotomayor is hardly a

4:38:17 to 4:38:38( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: readily wradded in a mystery inside an enigma. no matter what cross section we take of her extensive record down to examining individual cases, we see someone who has never expr overturn precedent nor have my colleagues beenable to point to any such case.

4:38:39 to 4:38:59( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: instead, we see someone would lets the guide her to correct of the law. we see someone would does not put her thumb on the scales of justice for either side even if any human being would want reach a difficult result for a sympathetic plaintiff. mr. president, we know more

4:39:00 to 4:39:20( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: about judge sotomayor than we have 100 years. the record gleaned from numerous studies about the way she has ruled in cases for 17 that's the best way to

4:39:21 to 4:39:41( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: a judge is going to be, to look at their previous cases -- and it sells when you look at those cases it tells plenty about her moderation. she has agreed with her republican colleagues 95% of the time and ruled for the government in 83% of immigration

4:39:42 to 4:40:02( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: cases presumably against the immigrant. she has ruled for the government in newt gingrich% o denied race claims in 83% of cases. she has split eve variety of employment cases. so no matter how we slice and

4:40:03 to 4:40:26( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: dies these cases we come up -- slice and dice these cases we come up th the same conusion on her moderation. when she ruled 87% of the time in fourth amendment cases which is an important, a area where decisions are highly fact based and judges have discretion to

4:40:27 to 4:40:51( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: decide within police hav when police have overstepped their bounds but they has no abused this discretion in the overwheing majority of cases because she sides with the government, deciding each case carefully based on the facts bef let's also look further at her immigration asylum cases. there she ruled for the government against the

4:40:52 to 4:41:17( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: petioner for asylum in 83% of the that's also telling of her modulated approach to asylum law as her judge new man has pointed out, gives judges a good deal of discretion who can be asylum to stay in the united states. judge sotomayor has not abused

4:41:18 to 4:41:38( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: this discretion a jot. hispanic neighborhood of the bronx we might expect her personal background would make her more, to borrow a term "empathetic" to an immigrant seeking asylum but the cases show that any perceived empathy did not affect her results. in fact, her 83% record puts her

4:41:39 to 4:41:59( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: right in the middle of judges in her circuit. even in the realm of sports cases which are always contentious and closely watched judge sotomayor has shown her even handedness. she ruled for the professional football league in a case brought by a layer and against major league baseball when she

4:42:00 to 4:42:22( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: ruled for the players and ended the baseball strike. i can go judge sotomayor voted to deny the victims of twa flight 800 cash a more generous recovery because that was "clearly a legislativ should not be made by the courts." if you have empathy you are certainly going to decide with the victims.

4:42:23 to 4:42:43( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: i've medicine some of their families. she didn't. the law didn't allow her. judge sotomayor ruled against an african-american couple would claimed they were bumped from a flight because of their rac again, against a couple case called king who said they were racially discriminated against.

4:42:44 to 4:43:04( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: she didn't think the facts merited their suit. judge sotomayor rejected the claims of a disabled black woman that said she was unfairly provided accommodations provided to white employees. my republican colleagues did not ask about these cases. instead they lood at her speeches -- not her cases, her

4:43:05 to 4:43:26( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: speeches -- and decided that judge sotomayor believes that is the proper role of the court of appeals to "make policy," and they condemned her for this view. making policy in cases where they this occurred in three cases in ricci, which involves the new haven firefighters in her second amendment case and in a case

4:43:27 to 4:43:48( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: involving property rights. i guess from the point of view of my republican colleagues judicial policy making is a bad thing except when it's in each of these they cases that they criticized were where they sized the short opinions which she did not write for hem self,

4:43:49 to 4:44:10( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: they said the ruling showed she was unable to grapple with major constitutional issues but in each case, judge sotomayor agreed with the other two members of her court that the second circuit or supreme court precedent squarely dictated the result. there was no need for a fuller explanation. second circuit rules forbid pane from revisiting squarely decided precedent.

4:44:11 to 4:44:32( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: in other words, in these cases she was avoiding "making policy," the cases were governed by the precedent. she was bound. they were died by it was just the fact that my friends across the aisle don't like what the settled law was. so we are getting awfully close to a double standard here.

4:44:33 to 4:44:55( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: in ricci they wanted her to overturn the second circuit discrimination and in the gun case they wanted her to anything nor a in property right cases they wanted her to ignore the law that governed the statute of limitations. my colleagues asked judge sotomayor abou

4:44:56 to 4:45:17( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: where she ruled the e.p.a. mistakenly considered a certain factor decidin whether a company used "the technology possibility to clean war," and the e.p.a. intention of the law judge sotomayor ruled against the government. yet my friend, senator sessions of alabama, stated that one of his reasons for opposing judges

4:45:18 to 4:45:39( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: sotomayo liberal pro-government ideology. it appears pro-government is a bad thing, except when it's not. let's talk about her answers to questions. some of my friends on both sides of the aisle have said supreme court nominees need to be more forthcoming confirmation process.

4:45:40 to 4:45:48( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: they fear that the hearings have become a little more than a

4:46:07 to 4:46:28( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: choreographed kabuki dance. -- promises that they would keep an open mind, respect the law and give everyone an equal chance. of course they would. candidates with little to hide, not sprigsly, have answered more questions than stealth nominees who truly have been outside the mainstream. examples of candates who had nothing up their sleeves and swered questions in a straightforward manner include judge steven breyer in 1994.

4:46:29 to 4:46:49( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: he answered the question by senator believe that washington b. davis set a law" and secondly, "do you agree in" and then ruth bader ginsburg anered questions about casey and abortion precedence. justices alito and roberts

4:46:50 to 4:47:10( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: declined to answer question after question after question. then judge rocke answer the -- then judge roberts would not answer the most basic questions about commerce clause jurisprudence. then-judge alito would not say whether the thought the constitutional right to privacy including the holding in more detail, but i think we have

4:47:11 to 4:47:32( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: seen that this was part after strategy to play an ideological shell game and now ware preantsed with a candidate whose views are truly moderate, as proven through the most copious records in 14 u7b years and none grassley from iowa beliefs that

4:47:33 to 4:47:53( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: her performance left him with more questions an answers. i have to respectfully disagree. but judge sotomayor again, in addition to her full and transparent record, proved that she is not a stealth candidate. on abortion in the holding of roe, when asked by senator franken, do you believe that this right to privacy includes the trite have ann bortion,

4:47:54 to 4:48:14( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: judge sotomayor answered clearly and to the said in many cases, as i think has been repeated in the court's jurisprudence in casey, that there is a right to privacy that women have with respe termination of their pregnancies in certain situations." clear, to the point. when then-judge roberts was asked this question, he replied,

4:48:15 to 4:48:36( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: "well, i feel i need to stay away from a discussion of particular cases. i'm happy to disuts principles of stare decisance the court has developed a series of precedents on precedent, if you will, they should have a number of cases talking about this principle that should be applied applied." so, who spoke clearly to the question?

4:48:37 to 4:48:58( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: sotomayor did, how could you vote for judge roberts? on property rights, when asked by senator grassley about her understanding of the court's holding in kelo, sotomayor explained fully her understanding of the court's holding. and there is a quote "when asked about his view of kelo, then-judge alito declined

4:48:59 to 4:49:01( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: to success is the case and there are many more examples of how