Senate Proceeding on Aug 6th, 2009 :: 0:45:35 to 1:00:30
Total video length: 12 hours 31 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

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

Views:105 Duration: 0:14:55 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

0:45:32 to 0:45:52( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: quorum call: mr. hatch: madam the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: madam president, on tuesday i explained some of the reasons why i canno nomination of judge sotomayor to replace justice david souter,

0:45:35 to 1:00:30( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Orrin Hatch

0:45:53 to 0:46:13( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: and i will mention a few today. these are a few points, her record conflicts with principles about the judiciary in which i deeply believe. i wish president obama had chosen a hispanic nominee whom all senators could support. during the debate this week many

0:46:14 to 0:46:34( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: of my democratic friends read judge sotomayor resume rather than reviewing her record. nearly every speaker said that she has more federal judicial experience than any supreme court nominee in a century. i believe she does, and i respect her for it. but justice samuel alito only

0:46:35 to 0:46:55( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: had one less year of judicial experience an five more years on the federal court of appeals when he was nominated. he had been a prosecutor and well-qualified rating from the a.b.a. 19 current democratic senators threatened to filibuster his nomination, including the president.

0:46:56 to 0:47:19( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: other senators emphasized the importance of appointing someone with judge sotomayor's inspiring once again, i do not disagree. she has an inspiring life story and a great ethnic heritage. yet she i

0:47:20 to 0:47:45( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: far more dignity an respect than qualified nominee with an inspiring story. the senate, for example, today will vote on judge sotomayor's nomination. in 2003, for the first time in american history this body was prevented from the estrada nomination even though he had majority support.

0:47:48 to 0:48:08( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: senators and goos and grassroots groups said opposed even holding an up or down vote for was -- miguel estrada was disgrace full and damaging to the traditions an practices of this boasmed my democratic colleagues want people to

0:48:09 to 0:48:30( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: believe that the concerns about the sotomayor nomination limited to 1 speech and one case. some of them said as much at the review should be limited to only certain parts of the nominee's record. as i've done with past nominees, however, i sotomayor's entire record for

0:48:31 to 0:48:51( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: insight into her judicial philosophy. in addition to the controversial sp judge sotomayor gave a speech at suffolk university law school later published in that review. she embraced the idea that the law is indefinite, impermanent and experimentmental.

0:48:52 to 0:49:12( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: she rejected what she called -- quote -- "the public myth that law can be certain and stabl unquote. she said that judges may in their decisions develop novel approaches and legal frame works that push the law in new directions. judge sotomayor's speech and article presen

0:49:13 to 0:49:33( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: perfect judicial storm where her views of judging meet her views of the law. combined partiality and subject activity with uncertainty and instability in the law and the result is philosophy and that the american reject. my democratic colleagues will no doubt

0:49:34 to 0:49:54( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: sotomayor's do not dicial philosophy. but, rember, that appeals court judges are bound by supreme court precedent. on the supreme sotomayor will help fashion the precedence that -- that today bind judge sotomayor. that makes other views

0:49:55 to 0:50:18( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: expressed, i might add, while she has been a sitting jud much morrell vant to her -- much more relevant to her position on the supreme court than the appeals court. nonetheless sotomayor has made many troubling decisions on the appeals court. on tuesday, for examp

0:50:19 to 0:50:39( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: discussed the case of kidden -- ddidev. the village of port chester. conclusion that mr. should have

0:50:40 to 0:51:01( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: she ruled that general economic development can constitute the public use that justifies the taking of private property. we hear a decisions affect people. the "san francisco said that the decision might

0:51:02 to 0:51:22( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: turn the american dream of homeownership on its head. and one "washington post" headline after the decision read "court greatest risk." this decision was devastating not only for the right to private property in general but for individual homeowners i particular.

0:51:23 to 0:51:43( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the decision in kelo was issued after the briefing and art of didden, but before judge sotomayor had issued her decision. even though kelo was a hallmark or should i say landmark decision that dramatically changed the takings, she did not ask for a rebriefing or

0:51:44 to 0:52:04( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: instead it took her more year to issue a cursory, four-paragraph opinion that not only made it easier for the government to take property, but also severely limited the challenge the take of their property in court. i and other senators have discussed judge sotomayor's troubling decisions regarding the second amendment right to

0:52:05 to 0:52:26( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: keep and bear arms. she has applied the wrong legal standard to conclude that the second amendment does not kp state and restricting the right to bear arms. and she has gra ough ough held that the right to bear arms is insufficient that any reason is a reason to

0:52:27 to 0:52:48( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: justify a weapons restriction. no federal judge in america has expressed a more narrow, cramped and lited view of ri bear arms. my friends on the other side of the aisle have made creative attempts troubling decisions. perhaps the most curious is the seco amendment right to keep and bear arms supreme court.

0:52:49 to 0:53:09( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: on the other hand, i am baffled why this should bother those who believe in a flexible and shape-shifting the supreme court, after all, makes up rights all the time. the right to abortion comes immediately to mind without a peep from most of my democratic friends on the other s aisle. but the senator who offered this

0:53:10 to 0:53:33( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: strange theory should simply read the constitution. the right to keep and bear arms is right there, right in the constitution, in black and white. perhaps he is instead referring to the supreme court's recognition last year that right to bear arms rather than a collective right. perhaps that is why he believes

0:53:34 to 0:53:55( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the supreme court rights. but the second amendment said that the right to bear arms is a right of -- quote -- "the people." unquote. the fourth amendment says the same thing about the right against unreasonable searches and seizures. it too is a "of the people." unquote. does any senator doubt that the

0:53:56 to 0:54:16( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: fourth amendment protects an individual right? does the senator who believes the supreme court made up the individual right to bear arms believe that supreme court made up the free from unreasonable government searches? when i shared this judiciary subcommittee on the constitution in 1982, we on the second amendment right to

0:54:17 to 0:54:38( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: keep and bear arms. it thoroughly examined the long and rich history of this right which predates the constitution itself. thus anyone can see why i'm very concerned about this. we went -- right about it. as the supreme court recognized it was a fundamental right of

0:54:39 to 0:54:59( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: englishmen at the time of america's second amendment was codified. justice story called this -- quote -- "the the liberties of the public." unquote. our report

0:55:00 to 0:55:22( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: to bear arms is f individual. the supreme court may have taken a long time to recognize this constitutional fact, but it made -- made nothing in doing so. be printed in the record following my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: i thank the chair. finally, let me describe one

0:55:23 to 0:55:44( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: found very troubling. before i say that, eight o 10 cases of judge sotomayor heard by the supreme court were reversed. the ninth one she was seriously criticized for her approach to the law. and that was a 5-4 decision. these are matters that bother a lot of people. i've mentioned a wholeaft of

0:55:45 to 0:56:05( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: other cases and a whole raft of other issues in my prior remarks here, so those remarks. now, prior to her judicial service, judge sotomayor was closely situated with rican legal defense and

0:56:06 to 0:56:27( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: education fund. from 1980 to 1992 judge sotomayor held at least 11 different leadership positions with the fund. including serving as a member of the executive committee and as a member and chairman of its litigation committee.

0:56:28 to 0:56:48( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: in a 1992 profile "the new york times" described judge sotomayor as a top policymaker with the fund. other articles and profiles in the "times" and associated press say that she met frequently with the legal staff, reviewed the status of pending cases, and briefed the board about those

0:56:49 to 0:57:10( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: cases and was an involved and ardent supporter of the fund's legal efforts. theseesiptions relied upon and quoted lawyers with whom she worked minutes from the litigation committee specifically judge sotomayor reviewing the fund's litigation strategy in cases.

0:57:11 to 0:57:31( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: at her hearing i asked judge sotomayor whether she had been aware of the friend of the court briefs that the fund found in several court abortion cases. i just wanted truth was.

0:57:32 to 0:57:52( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: i asked her about that because those briefs made arguments that can only be described as extreme. even by some who are in the pro abortion -- proabortion movement. the fund compared the refusal to pay for abortions with taxpayers' medicaid funds to

0:57:53 to 0:58:13( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: oppression of blacks symbolized by the supreme court's infinite dred scott opinion. the fund opposed restrictions, iluding that parents be informed before their young daughters have an abortion. the fund argued that the first amendment right to freely exercise religion somehow under

0:58:14 to 0:58:35( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: minds parental notification laws. when i asked judge sotomayor about these briefs a arguments, i made absolutely clear in my -- in my preference remarks, tha i was asking only about whether she knew about and agreed with them at the time the briefs were filed. i was not asking her, even about

0:58:36 to 0:58:56( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: her current views, let alone posi take in the future the judge sotomayor told me that -- future. judge sotomayor told me that she did not kw that the fund was filing those briefs or making those arguments. at times she used what appeared to be the prepared talking point that she had not -- quote -- "prepared the briefs." unquote.

0:58:57 to 0:59:18( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: in answering my questions she went further are than that and said -- quote -- "obviously the fund was involved in litigation, so i knew generally they were filing briefs. but i wouldn't know until after the fact that the brief was actually filed." unquote. to be clear judge sotomayor said that she never knew until after a brief had already been filed what arguments were made in the

0:59:19 to 0:59:39( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: brief. or even that it had been filed at all. i was shocked at this response, and, frankly, found this claim very difficult to believe. how can a leader of the legal defense fund actively working

0:59:40 to 1:00:01( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: with the legal supervising the staff during some of the years, briefing the board about pending cases, and an involved supporter of the fund's legal efforts be completely out of the loop about the briefs that the fund is filing and the arguments the fund is make. -- did her discussions about the --

1:00:02 to 1:00:24( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: with the legal team about pending cases skip these high-profile supreme court i've got to tell you, i doubt it. did she brief the board about erything but these abortion briefs? i doubt the six abortion cases in which the court found briefs were among the the supreme court docket.

1:00:25 to 1:00:31( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the 1989 case of webster v. reproductive health care services, for example, attracted