Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on Aug 5th, 2009 :: 4:52:45 to 5:00:25
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

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:118 Duration: 0:07:40 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Charles Schumer

4:52:36 to 4:52:58( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: again, using a different standard for judge sotomayor than the standard they used for judges like roberts, so, let me give my friends some reassurance, the proof of the pudding, the proof is in the

Charles Schumer

4:52:45 to 5:00:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Charles Schumer

Charles Schumer

4:52:59 to 4:53:19( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: pudding. judge sotomayor is and always has been a moderate judge. like many, many judges across the country, she has remained neutral in race cases, in spite of her in gender cases in spite of her gender. in first amendment cases in spite of racist and repugnant speakers.

Charles Schumer

4:53:20 to 4:53:40( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: the s courtroom are not weighted. so let me now conclude by discussing t past nominions. more broadly, where i think my colleagues are headed and where we ought to be going instead. in 2001 i wrote an op-ed arguing arguing that we need to take ideology into account when evaluating

Charles Schumer

4:53:41 to 4:54:01( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: judges. i wrote that op-ed because i was astounded by the nominees that president bush's administration was sending to the senate. the conservative movement had captured congress and the white house for the first time, but even though conservatives, strong conservatives, controlled thee

Charles Schumer

4:54:02 to 4:54:23( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: two branches, the hard right was not able to move the country as far to the right as they had so they turned to the judiciary. they couldn't do it with the president, even though they had elected him. they couldn't do it with the house or the senate, even though, again, the hard right had precome to nat nateed, and so they -- predominated and so

Charles Schumer

4:54:24 to 4:54:44( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: turned to the one unelected branch -- the judiciary -- to advance the agenda that they weren't able to move through the democratically elected branches of government. the bush with the hard right and nominated judges that were so far out of the mainstream it would have been irresponsible for us to confirm them blindly. so we

Charles Schumer

4:54:45 to 4:55:07( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: their judicial philosophy and their ideology and our questions were not met with thorough answers or with a demonstrated record of mainstream judging but with banalities. if we tried to rank them on a scale of one to 10 with one being all the way to the right, say like judge thomas, ten being

Charles Schumer

4:55:08 to 4:55:28( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: all the way to the left,ay like justice brennan, i think the bush nominees to the supreme court and court of appeals were almost exclusively ones and twos, way over. if you looked at president clington's somewhat left of center but not much, mainly sixes and sevens.

Charles Schumer

4:55:29 to 4:55:50( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: prosecutors, partners in law firms, not lawyers had had spent their careers in activist causes. president obama has taken a different approach. he's -- he's trying to return the the court to the middle, t the pre-bush having judges that may not be exactly what the right wants in a judge or even when the left,

Charles Schumer

4:55:51 to 4:56:11( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: the far left wants in a judge. we are returning to the days where judges were fives and sixes and sevens, fours. they were squarely in the mainstream. when judges put the rule of law first. and somehow my republican

Charles Schumer

4:56:12 to 4:56:32( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: colleagues are aghast. the only judges they seem to want to vote for are ones and twos, judges who are on the hard right. and the president is not going to nominate judges who have that view. after all, elections do matter. my colleagues say they don't want "activist "requests judges. what they really mean is they don't want judges who will put

Charles Schumer

4:56:33 to 4:56:54( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: the rule of law first. they only want judges who will impose their conservative views. an activist now seems to be not someone who respects the rule of law but someone who is not hard right. if you are mainstream, even though you're interpreting the law, you are an activist because

Charles Schumer

4:56:55 to 4:57:16( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: you'll not turn the clock back. we must and will continue to fight for mainstream judges. i have heard some say that this fight isn't really about judge sotomayor, given her proven record of mainstream judging and fidelity to the law. these commentators argue that republicans are laying down their obama's next nom i don't know who that nominee

Charles Schumer

4:57:17 to 4:57:41( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: will be, but i am confident it will be a qualified candidate who is significantly more in the mainstream, if you take the mainstream being the actual place where the middle of america is -- more in the mainstream than justices thomas or scalia or roberts or alito. or some of the nominations that we considered under the bush

Charles Schumer

4:57:42 to 4:58:04( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: bush, like miguel ceas januarjanice pickering. i'm confident that the next nominee will beonsistent with the nominees that president obama has been sending us -- moderate, mainstream and rule of law. at one point the replican party argued for precedent and for strict construction because they wanted to push back on certain new precedents they thought were beyond the

Charles Schumer

4:58:05 to 4:58:26( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: constitution, precedents such a roe things have changed. americans have accepted roe and americans have accepted miranda. now my colleagues want to change the law. so they've changed their methodology without changing the nomenclature. they still call the judges quks activists" even though they want to stick to established law, and i think it i

Charles Schumer

4:58:27 to 4:58:47( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: it is a shame that some of my colleagues can't put aside tir own personal ideology and ve for a judge whom they might not have chosen but who's u unquestionable mainstream. it is a a unanimous vote in favor of this n sides of the aisle, from justice ginsburg and scalia have

Charles Schumer

4:58:48 to 4:59:08( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: received in the past. and i think it is a shame that debate about this historic nomination has been distilled to disputes over snippets of speeches. but we're not going to let senate pride, we're not going to let that stop the national pride we take in this mr. president. we're not going to us from confirming by a broad

Charles Schumer

4:59:09 to 4:59:29( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: and bipartisan margin judge sonia sotomayor to be the first hispanic justice on the u.s. supreme court. in conclusion, as judge adams said, "we are a not of men. but if the law were just words on parchment it would never evolve to reflect our own changing society." veapt but equal would never have been understood to be

Charles Schumer

4:59:30 to 4:59:50( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: unequal. equality for women would have never been viewed as guaranteed under the constitution's protection of equal protection. in fact, the second amendment might never have been viewed to extend beyond the trite possess a front-loading musket to defend

Charles Schumer

4:59:51 to 5:00:11( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: in a militia against an occupying force. with the nomination of justice sotomayor, we have a noble opportunity to restore faith in the notion that reflect the same ideals that are embraced by america. our served as a beacon of justice for the rest of the wld.

Charles Schumer

5:00:12 to 5:00:25( Edit History Discussion )

Charles Schumer: our system of checks and balances is the envy of every freedom-seeking nation. and as i loo judge sotomayor's life, her record and

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid