Lindsey Graham Announces Support Of Sotomayor

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:19:02 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Consistent with his deferential approach to a President's Supreme Court nominations, Sen Lindsay Graham (R-SC)announced his support of the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court:

Graham, in a floor speech, said he believes Sotomayor is a “mainstream” jurist who “is bound by the law.” He said he was “voting for her because I find her to be well-qualified. Elections matter and those that have served beside her for years find her to be an extraordinary woman.”

Kudos to Graham for his consistency on this issue. I disagree with him with regard to the deference due the President on judicial appointments, but at least he was not a hypocrite, like Jon Kyl.

Speaking for me only

< Chinese Factory Worker Leaps to Death Over Missing iPhone | Amazon Buys Zappos for $800 Million in Stock >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Lindsey Graham Announces Support Of Sotomayor | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I wish Sen. Graham luck (5.00 / 0) (#1)
by Steve M on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:35:04 PM EST

in his presidential bid.

Funny (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by andgarden on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:40:43 PM EST

Maybe Charlie Crist's wife will have so free time to do appearances. . .


: cunning little retort :) (none / 0) (#6)
by Militarytracy on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:45:57 PM EST

I don't (none / 0) (#2)
by CST on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:36:31 PM EST

Well, maybe in the primary...


: I did not say (none / 0) (#3)
by Steve M on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:37:40 PM EST

that I wished him success.

Well, Lindsey (none / 0) (#9)
by KeysDan on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 03:07:29 PM EST

would probably be great on budgetary matters. After all, in Jan 20007, during his stroll through the Bab al-Sharqi Market in Baghdad, with his pal John McCain, he was able to pick up "five rugs for five bucks". If we overlook all those incidental security costs incurred, we must admit the guy watches the purse strings.


: Interesting (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by Steve M on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 03:12:42 PM EST

I wonder if we could determine from watching C-SPAN which five of his Republican colleagues are now wearing those rugs?

It is hard for me (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by Militarytracy on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:40:44 PM EST

to get excited about one incident of a Republican not being a big fat hypocrite. I do believe in rewarding good behavior, but this feels like giving the Ferryman a compliment on his consistently black wardrobe choices. I promise to work on possibly being able to see the good things in works of Republicans. I have little faith though that it is possible in my near future due to continued Republican devolution

: me too (5.00 / 3) (#7)
by Carolyn in Baltimore on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:56:07 PM EST

He was a total ass during the hearings even as he signaled he might vote for her. Bless his little heart.

Guess he does not share Charlie Crist's (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by ruffian on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:33:40 PM EST

deep concern over her respect for the right to keep and bear arms.

Really, even if you had no other information you could tell who is facing a Republican primary by their stance on this nomination.

: i think everyone should be able to (none / 0) (#18)
by cpinva on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 11:32:33 PM EST

Guess he does not share Charlie Crist's deep concern over her respect for the right to keep and bear arms.
keep and bear their arms, tanned or not. guns are another matter entirely. frankly, a high % of the population has no business whatever anywhere near a gun, loaded/unloaded/toy, they're just too stupid.
what, you seriously think the author's of the constitution meant for every idiot on the block to be able to own a gun? not hardly. were that truly the case, they needn't have bothered mentioning that small matter of a "well regulated militia". what would be the point?
i know jeralyn has read into the second amendment an individual right that appears nowhere in it, either directly or by inferrence. she's wrong.

Pols are Pols (none / 0) (#12)
by Saul on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 03:55:13 PM EST

His reasons could be or not be the real reasons for voting for her. More probable that he does not want to antagonize the Latino vote.

too late (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by CST on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 03:59:00 PM EST

anyone who saw the confirmation hearings (and a lot of latino voters did) will be antagonized by the way he treated her during those hearings. Those that didn't watch, will probably hear about it from those that did.


: and (none / 0) (#15)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 05:39:55 PM EST

most probably will not bother to find out or even care much how he voted.

: If they didn't watch, but (none / 0) (#16)
by nycstray on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 06:38:22 PM EST

did watch the evening news, they prob could tell just from the snippets shown.
What a disgusting man.

Its A Pity (none / 0) (#14)
by bob h on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 04:56:03 PM EST

he could not have been more gracious and gentlemanly during the hearings. He cost the Republicans support among Hispanics all by himself.

When did mainstream become a good thing? (none / 0) (#17)
by BeAware on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 09:11:36 PM EST

I think most would agree that the mainstream legal system has some serious flaws in it, and some seriously flawed individuals behind the reins as well. Our mainstream idea of justice doesn't take into account what is right vs. what is wrong, it only cares about what is lawfull vs. unlawfull. What that produces are people not getting truly fair, objective trials, but instead they have other peoples situations mirrored onto them with our rigid idea of precedence. Someone who only echos that mainstream rigidity shouldn't be looked at so favorably.

Another thing to keep in mind is that a supreme court judge holds a puppet post, meaning their candidacy is dependent upon how well they follow orders from the top levels of their political party. There are gaggles of people with the same academic and professional qualifications as Sotomayor, but she was picked for her socio-political impact and her loyalty to the ruling bodies of the government.