we had dick durbin in earlier, he didn't want to make that prediction, but doesn't seem to be any question she'll be confirmed. >> those are the opening statements the senators get to make. we'll hear her opening statement and come back to the drawing board. that's going to do it for us. >> remember, watch the confirmation hearings live right here on cnn all beginning at 10:00 a.m. eastern live on cnn and cnn.com. and the news continues with heidi collins in the "cnn newsroom." good morning, everybody, it's monday, july 13th, i'm heidi collins, and you are in the "cnn newsroom." an awful lot going on today obviously. all eyes on capitol hill this morning for an historic hearing, in fact, where judge sonia sotomayor is trying to become the very first latino on the u.s. supreme court. that live testimony begins in just one hour. of course, we will be covering it very closely for you. also this hour, the pentagon has a new plan to fight militants in afghanistan and it could actually mean more u.s.

boost on the ground. we'll watch that story, as well. an emotional family reaction to the murder of a couple who had adopted a dozen special needs children. this morning on capitol hill, the judge makes her case. it is likely to be a long week too with lots of questions on her past rulings and exactly how she intends to weigh her new decisions. brianna keilar is live in capitol hill in the very room where the hearings will get underway in about an hour. set the scene for us. >> reporter: well, heidi, as you can see, still photographers already getting ready here, staking out their spot as sonia sotomayor comes into this hearing room. this is where it's all going to start. this seat here where patrick leahy, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee will give his opening statement. he is, of course, a supporter of sonia sotomayor, but will paying a lot of attention to what the

man who sits here says. jeff sessions, top republican on the committee, and he will be laying the ground work for some of the objections that we expect republicans will be raising today and over the next few days. and this right here is the seat, the hot seat where sonia sotomayor today in her opening statement is expected to talk a lot about her own personal story, of course, which began as a child growing up in a housing project in the south bronx and also be talking about, heidi, the type of justice she would be if confirmed to the supreme court. >> exactly. we know there are going to be concerns that the republicans will raise. go ahead and if you will, highlight what they will be once again. >> reporter: generally speaking, republicans have said they're concerned that sotomayor's opinions may color her decisions from the bench. so you may hear some of those concerns raised today about specific issues when they question her tomorrow, wanting to know her views on affirmative action, gun rights, not that

we're going toe get a clear answer. specifically there are likely to be specific targets, heidi. for instance her decision as an appeals court judge where she ruled against white firefighters in new haven, connecticut, claiming reverse discrimination, that's a decision that was recently reversed by the supreme court. ask we're also expecting some of those comments she made off the bench to come into question. of course, heidi, the one where she said she would hope more often than not a wise latina woman would come to a better conclusion than the white male, certainly we expect that to be an issue. >> yeah, well, we also know that personally she has gone through some things lately. namely a physical injury, this fractured ankle she got right after being nominated. and i've seen the special little device they have for her underneath where she'll be sitting today. >> reporter: and we're going show that to you. she fractured her ankle about a week after being nominated. this is what is under this table right here. it is kind of a foot stool in

that way, looks like a cushion and a binder and what appears to be a foot stool and tape keeping it all together. she's going to be here for hours and hours throughout these days this week. in attempt to make her feel somewhat more comfortable. we know she's been uncomfortable. >> there's no doubt an orthopedic surgeon has been consulted. >> reporter: i can't say for sure or not, but i suspect not. >> sure do appreciate that, though, that walk through. this is all going to begin very, very shortly here. we'll have everything for everybody on cnn. we'll check back with you a little bit later on, as well. so what would you ask sonia sotomayor if you had the chance? we're curious about that. let us know by adding your comments on my blog, go to cnn.com/heidi and we'll read some of your comments coming up later on in the show. and again, we will have live coverage on the confirmation hearing beginning at the top of

the hour. you can see it here on cnn. or if you are away from your tv and you can't find one anywhere, just go to cnn.com. we'll have all of the latest information on the proceedings for you there, as well. the president gets back to domestic business this week after spending the last week overseas. and today, president obama begins the morning with his usual daily briefings from senior and economic advisers. at 1:15 this afternoon, he'll be meeting for a closed door session in the roosevelt room. and a little bit later, he welcomes the columbus crew soccer team to the rose garden. and at 4:00 p.m., he is making remarks at the urban and met poll metropolitan. president obama says the nation needs to look forward, not back. but attorney general eric holder says not so fast. sources are telling us now the

nation's top attorney is leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to look into bush era harsh interrogation techniques. and according to a justice department official, holder could decide whether to begin a criminal probe within the next few weeks. so if the investigation moves forward, it will only look into those who may have gone beyond the justice department's legal guidelines for interrogations during the bush era. and some congressional democrats want another bush era probe, this one puts the spotlight on dick cheney. did he order the cia to hide a secret counterterrorism program from congress? our jim acosta has the details on that now. >> reporter: in a closed door hearing late last month, cia director leon panetta told the senate intelligence committee he had just terminated a secret counterterrorism program. so sensitive, the panel was told that during the bush administration, former vice president dick cheney himself had ordered the cia to conceal it from key members of congress

who hear top secret briefings. the so-called gang of 8. >> he did brief us. and in the course of the briefing, he did say because i believe somebody asked a question as to why it was never reported to us that the vice president had given the directive that the program not be reported to the congress. >> reporter: the matter has once again put cheney at the center of a heated debate. on the limits of white house powers. >> there is a requirement for disclosure, it has to be done in an appropriate way so it doesn't jeopardize our national security. but to have a massive program that is concealed from the leaders in congress is not only inappropriate, it could be illegal. >> to somehow suggest it might have been improper for the president or the vice president to keep an important program secret, i mean, that happens every day. >> reporter: little is known about the secret program, only it was initiated during the 9/11 attacks.

mary madeline accuse the obama white house of disclosing the program out of pure politics. >> every time they get in trouble, which the president's poll numbers are slipping and his health care and global warming initiatives are under assault, they dredge up a story. >> reporter: but it's a story that comes as attorney general eric holder just might name a prosecutor to investigate the bush administration's harsh interrogation techniques used on terrorism suspects. something republicans would rather avoid. >> so the question is, did they go too far in some of these areas? i hope we don't feel -- the attorney general doesn't feel a need to go back into it. >> and jim acosta live from washington. jim, what's congress going to be doing about this? >> well, an investigation, how far that goes, we'll have to see. but members of congress are looking at ways to expand the number of members in the congress who were told about these top secret briefings.

some are talking about one proposal that would expand the number of lawmakers from that gang of 8 to a gang of 40 and right now the white house is pretty cool to that idea. and heidi, as you're reading that agenda for the president earlier this morning, i was thinking, you know, this is one item on the agenda that the obama administration would rather not deal with, or at least those inside the white house. he does not want to look back. but as these revelations keep coming out, the attorney general seems to be moving toward some sort of investigation of all of this. he hasn't made a final decision, but as you mentioned, at least one source telling cnn he's leaning toward that. >> we will continue to follow that one alongside you. thank you, jim. >> you bet. a new workweek is getting underway now. but in southern ohio, some people are still cleaning up from the weekend. in pike county, five people were hurt when a tornado tore through the town of buchanan, at least

three mobile homes were destroyed. and reynolds wolf is standing by for us this morning to tell us more about that. and the week ahead. good morning to you, reynolds. >> rough times in parts of ohio. we've had rough times in the southeast this weekend. and right now, the heaviest precipitation in some of the strongest storms actually in parts of central alabama back in mississippi and even into portions that say arkansas where it's been kind of a rough time to say the least. not only do we have the issues of possibly strong storms, maybe even a little bit of flash flooding. later on today, it could be part of the mid mississippi valley back into portions of the central plains where could be dealing with severe storms. looks like the best chance may occur late into the afternoon. same story for the northern plains and big sky country. the biggest threat you'll have with this, not only damaging winds, but possibly large hail into the afternoon. something else we're going to be dealing with severe into the afternoon, it's going to be this stuff. we're talking about plenty of heat, back in texas, up to 104

begin, for dallas and houston, 99 degrees. the humidity's going to make all of the difference. not quite as humid in las vegas or phoenix, but soaring heat with 107 and up to 112 in phoenix by sky harbor airport. in seattle, 70 degrees, back into minneapolis and chicago, 70s and 80s. and we finish up in new york and boston with high temperatures of 78 and 81 degrees respectively. heidi, as far as the space shuttle's concerned, looks like a 60% chance of scattered showers through the central part, possibly some thunderstorms. looks like once again successful liftoff today or any takeoff at all is going to be a coin toss. back to you. >> let us know if that changes. appreciate it. thank you. a new plan for afghanistan. the general in charge says he may need more u.s. troops. and that could mean billions more in spending. between an environment at risk

and an environment in balance. between consuming less and conserving more.

there is one important word: how. and it is the how that makes all the difference. to the planet we all share. we have ever created. a car that can help awaken its driver if he begins to doze... keep him in his lane if he starts to wander... even stop itself if he becomes distracted. if you want to see the future of the automobile, this is the 9th generation e-class. this is mercedes-benz.

a new plan to fight the taliban in afghanistan. the pentagon says it may want afghanistan to double the size of the army, but that could end up costing billions in u.s.

funding and would probably even mean more u.s. troops would be needed. our pentagon correspondent barbara starr joining me to talk more about this. are we talking about training here? there would need to be more training need to be done i would imagine to get the afghanistan troops up to speed. >> well, that pretty much sums it up, heidi. in fact, the new commanding general in afghanistan mcchrystal has been conducting this assessment of what's going on in the country and what's really needed to turn things around there. senior u.s. military officials very familiar with his thinking tell us he is now set to recommend, in fact, a doubling of the size of the afghan army. it's set to grow to 134,000, he may want to double it beyond that, but what does that mean? it may, may, in fact mean, heidi, more u.s. troops to work as trainers and billions of dollars in additional u.s. spending. heidi? >> as we learn about these things, what is the reaction seem to be? >> well, cautious to say the least. because first they have to finish getting some of those

troop reductions in iraq in order to basically free up the troops to go. they have to find the money, they have to really get strategy together, and spell out to congress how they hope to make this work. the goal, of course, is to put an afghan face on the war and that's why there's so much concern about sending in even more u.s. troops, defense secretary gates has been very cautious about all of that, not wanting to put too much of a u.s. foreign occupation on it, if you will. it was once called the forgotten war. right now folks are referring to it as the fastest growing war. >> i imagine they are. barbara starr, appreciate that. live from the pentagon this morning. security officials are looking now into disturbing allegations surrounding a cia ally in afghanistan. they say the afghan war lord may be responsible for killing hundreds of taliban p.o.w.s and the cia resisted efforts to investigate him. president obama discussed the situation with anderson cooper

in an exclusive interview during his trip to ghana. >> it now seems clear that the bush administration resisted efforts to pursue investigations of an afghan war lord who was on the cia payroll. it's now come out there were hundreds of taliban prisoners under his care who got killed, some were suffocated in a steel container, others shot, possibly buried in mass graves. would you support or call for an investigation into possible war crimes in afghanistan? >> indications this had not been properly was investigated just recently brought to my attention. what i've asked my national security team to do is to collect the facts for me that are known. and we'll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it once we have all of the facts together. >> you wouldn't resist categorically an investigation? >> i think that, you know, there are responsibilities that all nations have even in war. and if it appears that our

conduct in some way supported violations of the laws of war, then i think we have to know about that. >> thousands of taliban prisoners -- in late 2001. in fact, you can catch the entire interview with anderson cooper and president barack obama at 10:00 p.m. tonight right here on cnn. an international human rights group is calling for an investigation now into the death of an iranian teenager during last month's election protest in tehran. the 19-year-old was apparently shot dead during the june 15th rally, but his parents were not told until 26 days later. the iranian government officials could not be reached for comment on the story. the teenager's funeral yesterday was attended by more than 300 mourners. some of them were people the family did not know who were there out of political sympathy. new arrests in a murder case

that is both heart breaking and shocking. who could've killed the parents of 16 children? police say they have uncovered details now that play out like a movie script. v@@w to build tomorrow's technology in amazing ways. and reshape the science of aerospace... forever. around the globe, the people of boeing... @w are working together -- for the dreams of generations to come. that's why we're here.

new developments today in the murder of a couple that has shaken a small florida community. we just got reaction from the dead woman's daughter as we await today's court hearing for two suspects. david mattingly live from pensacola, florida, with details on this. david, a devastating story. >> reporter: it is. we have three men in custody, two of them accused in this double murder, one accused of tampering with evidence. we're hearing from the family for the first time today hearing about their pain and sorrow and of the legacy left behind by the couple, by the billings couple as they adopted a dozen children with special needs over the years. a lot of questions about what their future holds and we heard this today. >> we'd like to start by thanking everyone for their support, especially the county sheriff's department and the surrounding community. our family cannot begin to find the words to express the pain and disbelief that we are in.

to know there are people capable of this type of violence and people with this magnitude of hate in their lives is sickening. our mom and dad only had love in their lives since the day they met 19 years ago, they knew they were soul mates. they chose a life that many people did not understand. together they decided to adopt a child, which turned into the adopting of many children. >> reporter: the dozen children they have adopted are being kept together and being cared for by family and that will be their future, being in the love and care of family for the rest of their lives. heidi? >> all right. cnn's david mattingly live this morning. thank you, david. one of three dangerous inmates who escaped from the indiana state prison has been caught in michigan. two convicted murderers and a third inmate serving time for rape broke out of the prison in michigan city, indiana, about 24 hours ago. a prison spokesman says the men escaped by somehow getting

passed bars in tunnels under the prison ground. now the latest on the illinois cemetery where bodies were dug out and dumped. a vigil, the state controller says he'll file paperwork this week to take the cemetery from the owner. and the reverend jesse jackson called for investigation into all of the cemeteries run by the country. the cemetery is now a crime scene and will be closed to families for a few more days. four cemetery employees are accused of digging up and dumping hundreds of bodies in a scheme to resell plots. still ahead this morning, jeffrey toobin, his latest book takes us inside the secret world of the support justices. what lies ahead for sonia sotomayor?

you have questions. who can give you the financial advice you need? where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world? these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management. here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience. (announcer) listening to you.

it's how we save you money at nationwide insurance. my name is sandy garza and i am on your side. only nationwide gives you an on your side review. you tell us about your life and your insurance. sometimes you don't have enough coverage. or you may even have too much. we'll let you know.

we listen and build you a custom policy of just the coverage you need at the right price for you. (announcer) only a nationwide insurance agent can give you an on your side review. call this number to save up to $523. we take a look at the policy and look to see if there's any gaps in coverage. you know, in addition, we talk about discounts that are available. and we try to save you money. i mean we really do. (anncr:) call this number now or call a local agent. switch today and save up to $523. listening and saving you money is how... ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪ on wall street this morning, we're looking at a fairly quiet open, but investors are buckling their seat belts for what is

sure to be a busy week ahead. stephanie elam at the new york stock exchange with a look at the day's market action. hey there, stephanie. >> hi, heidi, no lazy days of summer for us on wall street. stocks set for a higher opening this morning, followed by uneventful july week. but the dow has been on a slide for four weeks in a row. the focus this week, shifting to corporate earnings season. including financial giants goldman sachs, bank of america, citigroup, and jpmorgan chase, banks have been among the hardest hit companies since the recession gain in late 2007 as investments and loan losses piled up. in fact, taking a look at these companies, only goldman is anticipating giving truly stellar results. intel, google, ibm are also set to report their numbers, the s&p 500 companies are expected to have declined 32% in the second quarter versus a year ago. anything to earnings, it will be a bigger week for economic data,

inflation along with retail sales and housing starts are slated for release. we'll be keeping our eyes on all of that in the early going here, heidi, but overall, everybody's going to be taking a look at what's going to happen with earnings reports for sure. >> all right, stephanie. we'll be watching closely, thank you. >> thanks. the worldwide recession is still keeping prices down at the corner gas station, but according to the industry analysts, the lumberg survey, the national average fell about a dime a gallon over the past two weeks. the new average is about $2.56 a gallon. high, i'm sure you remember that. $4.11 a gallon. in california, top lawmakers say they may be nearing a deal on the state's crippling budget crisis. over the weekend, both parties met behind closed doors, they're trying to find ways to close a budget shortfall of more than $26 billion. for two weeks, the state has been operating without cash and has doled out ious to criminals

and suppliers. state workers have been told to take off three days a month without pay. that as we hear the opening bell this morning. that's again, monday, july 13th, expected to be kind of a lazy day, if you will, this monday. gearing up for a busy end to the week. so we'll keep our eye on those numbers as we always do here in the "cnn newsroom." all eyes are on capitol hill this morning. the senate confirmation hearing for supreme court nominee sonia sotomayor is due to get underway at the top of the hour, barring any huge stumble president obama's nominee is expected to win the job. democrats hold a comfortable majority on the judiciary committee and in the senate. but she does have some critics. the leading republican on the committee jeff sessions of alabama says sotomayor is outside the mainstream of legal thinking. if confirmed, sotomayor would become the first latina justice.

while the spotlight will be focussed on sonia sotomayor, the background of the senators themselves also deserve some illumination. one lawmaker is better known for his comedy career, while another is himself a former federal court nominee. here now with a closer look, cnn's senior legal analyst jeffrey toobin. you have all of the juice this morning because there are some really great stories out there about who the players are going to be. al franken who are is a total newcomer, right? >> we've got a great cast of characters. as the committee has 12 democrats and 7 republicans, and as you pointed out, there are many terrific stories. one of them is the senior republican jeff sessions. jeff sessions, republican of alabama, now the top republican on the committee way back in -- here we go, whoa, come back here. he was the attorney general of

alabama. and he was nominated to be a federal district court judge himself, he was rejected by this committee. now he's the top republican. another big story on the committee is -- as you mentioned, where is he? the junior member of the committee. >> the most junior, like 100 out of 100. >> al franken who is, this is going to be his first public act as a senator. another interesting person to watch is orrin hatch, the chairman of the committee for a long time, the utah republican. but here's something interesting, come back. he voted for -- when sonia sotomayor was nominated to the appeals court judge, he was a supporter of sotomayor. now will he support her for the supreme court? interesting question to watch. >> no, there's another one too, i think is really interesting and that's arlen specter, he has chaired many of these committees, correct? and now he's going to be sitting

there in the background because he switched parties and they tripped him of some of that power, so he may be sitting there going -- trying to help. >> he was the chairman of the committee when chief justice roberts was confirmed when justice alito was confirmed, now a junior democrat on the committee. we'll see how he responds to that role. >> you never know. let's talk, if we can, jeffrey, about cases that are going to be discussed. obviously we know this new haven firefighters case, this reverse discrimination will likely be brought up. >> absolutely. you know, we have a very extensive file here on all of judge sotomayor's rulings as a district court and circuit court judge, and as you pointed out, this was the case involving reverse discrimination claim by the white firefighters and, of course, just last month the supreme court ruled against

sotomayor's position and 5 to 4 said these firefighters had been victims of reverse discrimination. the four descenters were justice breyer, ginsburg, and souter, so the question is, what difference would her appointment make? on this case, probably not much, but that's one of the things we're going to be watching today. >> we are going to be watching it all. very interesting, just the dynamic of everybody. and what do they have? 30 minutes, right, each one of them? >> well, today it's 10-minute opening statements by each senator, and tomorrow when they get into questions, each senator gets 30 minutes to ask questions and, you know, this is the nerd super bowl. we are really excited about this, heidi. >> okay. well, we'll come back to you for the nerd expertise as much as we can. >> all right. >> jeff toobin, thanks so much. also i want to show you this video we are getting into the

"cnn newsroom." new video this morning, the arrival of the supreme court justice nominee for her confirmation hearings, sonia sotomayor, you see her there with the fractured ankle, which we hear is healing, but certainly going to be part of the story today because they had to make in case you missed it at the top of the show, had to make a contraption underneath the table in order to keep her comfortable with that broken ankle. so she's in the walking cast now and making her way slowly but surely to the chamber while all of this will be happening. and boy, oh boy, the media attention is intense. we'll have the coverage beginning at the top of the hour. you can see it here on cnn, or head to cnn.com. insurgents may have a new target in iraq. they could be gunning for religious groups. what this means and why the implications could go further than iraq's borders. it was tough news to hear.

everything changed. i didn't know what to do. right about then, our doctor mentioned the exelon patch. he said it releases medicine continuously for 24 hours. he said it could help with her cognition which includes things like memory, reasoning, communicating and understanding. (announcer) the most common side effects of exelon patch are nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. the likelihood and severity of these side effects may increase as the dose increases. patients may experience loss of appetite or weight. patients who weigh less than 110 pounds may experience more side effects. people at risk for stomach ulcers or who take certain other medicine should talk to their doctor because serious stomach problems, such as bleeding may worsen. mom's diagnosis was hard to hear, but there's something i can do. (announcer) visit exelonpatch.com for free caregiving resources.

rrd d oubut there's something i can do. naing onon ud r. weotototatatininci on us cars for everybody anont cfidedence ininin o. caususususlendnds s ve a a a t tcks. ququq n

. a alleged nazi camp guard was formally charged today with being an accessory to nearly 28,000 murders. the charge is filed in germany where the retired autoworker from cleveland was deported in may. a german court ruled earlier this month the 89-year-old was fit to stand trial. he denies the charges saying he was a prisoner of war and not a camp guard. the trial is expected to begin in the fall. a united states ambassador narrowly escapes a bomb attack in iraq. that blast coming just two weeks

after u.s. soldiers pulled out of major cities. cnn's michael ware explains how the increasing violence could include a new strategy by insurgents to ignite religious conflicts. >> reporter: in iraq, a road side explosive device detonated near the convoy of recently arrived u.s. ambassador christopher hill. u.s. embassy officials confirm that no embassy personnel were hurt in the attack, however an investigation is now underway. the region of southern iraq where the incident occurred has traditionally been an area controlled by iranian-backed militias. the attack came on a day when five christian churches in the capital of baghdad were also hit in separate bombings within a period of three hours on sunday evening in the capital, the churches were struck by explosive devices which killed four people and wounded 32. they came following a late night

explosion at an empty church the evening before. the attacks are the latest in a long-running series that have targeted iraq's christian community. no one has exact figures, it's believed that most of iraq's christian community that has fled the country since the american-led invasion in 2003. however, one of the witnesses to the most recent series of attacks on the churches said that if they continue, there will surely be no christians left in iraq. michael ware, cnn, baghdad. >> all right. i want to give you a look now inside at the confirmation hearing room for sonia sotomayor. of course, being looked at today and questioned today. in order to get this new position she will be replacing justice david souter as you well know. she will also be if making it through the process the first latina on the supreme court

panel. so you can see the gaggle of media. the photographers, the still photographers in front of her and then you can see everyone else gathering around, cameras and we could go on and on. we will be covering this live for you and bringing you gavel to gavel coverage of it beginning at 10:00 a.m. about 20 minutes out now, we already saw the judge making her way now into the building. so we will keep our eyes very closely trained on these pictures and bringi you the latest as they happen. taking its rightful place in a long line of amazing performance machines. this is the new e-coupe. this is mercedes-benz.

president obama fresh from an historic visit to ghana. he praised the country in africa and talked about hope for its future. but as cnn's ed henry tells us, he did not shy away from addressing the problems plaguing the continent. >> reporter: a day of extraordinary moments. none more powerful than the first african-american president visiting a former slave fortress with his family. >> i think it was particularly important for malia and sasha who are growing up in such a blessed way to be reminded that history can take very cruel turns. >> reporter: after touring cape coast castle, which the british

used as a slave dungeon, president obama compared its power to his recent stop at a german concentration camp. >> it is reminiscent of the trip i took to buchenwald. because it remind us of the capacity of human beings to commit great evil. >> reporter: the president used his personal connection to deliver some tough love in a speech to the parliament of ghana earlier in the day. >> we must start from the simple premise that africa's future is up to africa. i say this knowing full well the tragic past that is sometimes haunted this part of the world. after all, i have the blood of africa within me. and my family's own story encompasses both the tragedies and triumphs of the larger

african story. >> reporter: he chastised leaders over the corruption. saying they can't blame the west. >> no business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20% off the top. or the head of the port authority is corrupt. no person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery. this -- that is not democracy, that is tyranny. >> reporter: mr. obama's father was from kenya and visited that country as a senator. but he chose ghana as his first stop as president because he wanted to highlight its stable democracy and growing economy. so he mixed the stern lectures with some inspiration, the day having the feel of mr. obama taking last year's campaign to a whole new continent. in shirt sleeves playing with babies, working rope lines, ending his speech with a familiar slogan. >> the world will be what you

make of it. you have the power to hold your leaders accountable and to build institutions that serve the people. you can serve in your communities and harness your energy and education to create new wealth and build new connections to the world. you can concur disease and end conflicts and make change from the bottom up. you can do that. yes, you can. >> don't miss the "ac 360" special report on cnn tonight 10:00 eastern as anderson cooper shares his exclusive access to the president on his journey to africa. well, that confirmation hearing we've been talking about minutes away. after the break, our coverage continues from washington, d.c. with cnn's wolf blitzer. where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world? these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management.

here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience.

the united states supreme court, there's an opening for a justice on the supreme court, and the confirmation for sonia sotomayor is about to begin. we want to welcome our viewers around the world. these are the historic hearings that are about to begin. we are looking at the senate building where 19 members will have their opening statement. each senator today has scheduled no more than ten minutes for an opening statement that will set

the tune for what is going on and that will be followed by introductory remarks by the supreme court justice nominee, which is sonia sotomayor. i'm wolf blitzer here at cnn. we have the best political team here to assess what is going on. a full, full analyst of rosters and reporters. gloria borger is here with us as it with jewith jeff toobin, ale ca castellanos, candy crowley, our senior political correspondent. let's go over to jessica yellin. she's upstairs over at the

senate office building, the heart senate building, where the judiciary meetings are about to begin. patrick leahy of vermont will hit the gable and that will begin the process. first of all, her arrival, she's there in the senate office building right now? >> that's right. she has arrived and she will be escorted in by her home state senators, schumer and gillibrand. as you know, the judge has injured her foot, so she is in some pain, we're told, and there's been a makeshift little foot stool set up for her here in the senate room and for all of the activity that is going on behind me, much of the talk has been about what is she going to do with the foot? there is some draping behind the desk, believe it or not. if she wears a skirt, everything

is hidden and her foot will be resting on pillows and some blocks that have been propped up. but that's the colorful side of this story. the most important side, the first time in ten years that a democrat has nominated a judge to the supreme court. the makeup of the judiciary committee has changed significantly. senator biden is no longer here replaced by senator leahy. we'll see al franken here and both sides are ready for what the democrats hope will be a dull series of hearings and they hope to make important points to the conservative base, the republicans do, for what they think is an active form of judicial interpretation. >> jessica, stand by. gloria, this is real history right now. she would be only the third women ever to serve on the united states supreme court and the first hispanic ever to serve on the u.s. supreme court. >> that's right, for whom

english was not her first language. i was reading that in some of our research before. so i think it is an historic moment and i think it's pretty clear the kinds of questions that you're going to hear republicans asking. she did make a very controversial remark in a speech that a wise latina woman would issue a better opinion than a white, male judge. i think she'll be asked about things like that. and liberals will concern themselves about whether she's on their side on issues like abortion and rape. they are not quite sure about that. >> there have been some fireworks, jeff toobin. >> arlen specter likes to say that supreme court nominees say as little as possible in order to get confirmed. they really do try to duck the hard questions. sotomayor is well ahead.

there are 12 democrats and 7 republicans on the committee. 60 democrats and 40 republicans on the -- in the senate as a whole. this nomination is hers to lose. the less she says from her perspective, the better. >> you served in the clinton white house, maria. walk us through what she is going through. here she is. she's walking in right now. we see her walking in with the chairman of the committee, patrick leahy. we see these live pictures. the top republican on the senate judiciary committee, they are escorting her in. she's hobling a little bit. she's gone through an enormous amount of growing, maria, in the last few weeks, in terms of preparing her for what is not necessarily going to happen just today but then she'll deliver her opening statement.

and then tomorrow morning, each of those 19 u.s. senator also have 30 minutes to grill her and to ask some tough questions. >> this is going to be unlike anything she's ever done before. i mean, she has been confirmed twice by the senate district and second circuit, but this is a whole new ball game to use one of her famous cases. but i think that she's been doing what you have to do with these nominees, is walk them through, let them practice, throw ever top question. she got practice by visiting all of those senators so there's been a lot of cramming and i'm sure that she's going to do fine because she's been through this, she's accomplished, but it's going to be nerve racking. >> 87 senators i believe she met privately with, maybe 89. that's a lot, alex. republicans in terms of the questioning, judge sessions, he's a former judge himself. he asked to give her a polite hearing. i'm sure they will.

but there's a delicate line that they have to walk right now to make sure that they don't go too far in terms of hostile questions. >> i think that's right, wolf. and, of course, there have been enough issues raised about her juris prudence, about the law, whether empathy is more important than rule of law. there are enough issues there to talk about without talking about her personally. so i think you're going to see a very civil questioning from republicans and i think you're going to see very straight forward and tough questioning. >> which is appropriate, given the enormity of what is going to happen. she's 55 years old, candy crowley, and she could serve 30 years, maybe longer, on the united states supreme court. a president is elected for four year, if re-elected for eight years. but a supreme court justice could last for decades. it's appropriate to make sure that all of the vetting is there and all of the tough questions are asked. >> absolutely. and that's maybe what you're

hearing from the republicans to set the stage. again, i think alex is right. that you'll hear tough questioning, because here are the two sides to this. you have a huge and growing hispanics and they are looking at the core constituency and they are looking at a growing hispanic vote. so they can't be over the top on this. >> moments like this are, of course, not just about the supreme court justice here. this is about the country itself. this is going to reveal a lot about both parties, the republican party, how do they see the country. the democratic party, is it becoming a party of special preferences and a weaker juris prudence. those things are going to be litigated here. >> i think there's going to be a legal issue at the heart of the -- >> wait a minute. i think the chairman is beginning to speak. >> the nomination of sonia

sotomayor, the justice of the united states supreme court, judge sotomayor, welcome to the senate judiciary committee. you've been before us twice before when george bush nominated you and then when president clinton nominated you as a court of appeals judge. before we begin the opening statements of the senators, i know you have family members here. i don't know if your microphone is on or not, but would you please introduce the members of your family? >> if i introduced everybody that's family, we'd be here all morning. >> okay. what i'm going to do -- because some day this will be in the archives transcript, introduce whomever you like and then we will hold the transcript open for you to add any other names

that you want. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will limit myself to just my immediate family. sitting behind me is my brother, juan sotomayor, next to him is my mom, celina sotomayor, next to her is my favorite husband of my mom, omar lopez, next to him is my niece, kiley sotomayor, and next to her is my sister-in-law, then there's corey connor. cory and connor sotomayor. i should have said their last name first together. and then the remainder of that row is still with god, children, and dear friends. but this is my immediate family. >> thank you very much. i remember reading about the surprise of your swearing in of a district court judge because

they've never seen such a large crowd of friends and supporters arrive. what we're going to do is each senator will give a ten-minute opening statement. i would hope that all of the senators are able to be here today. if they are not, then we will have time tomorrow. senat senator schumer will have less time today because he'll get more time during the introduction. the constitution is interesting in this regard. we have over 300 million americans but only 101 people get a chance to say who's going to be on the supreme court.

first and foremost, the president. in this case, president obama who made the nomination. and then 100 senators have to stand in place of all 320 million americans in considering the appointment. the president has done his part. he's made an historic nomination. now the senate has to do his part on behalf of the senate people, on behalf of the american people. president obama often quotes martin luther king jr.'s insight that the ark of the universe is long but bends towards justice. each generation of americans has south that ark towards justice. we've improved upon the foundation of our constitution through the bill of rights, the civil war amendments, the 19th amendment expansion of the right to vote to women, the civil rights act of 1964, voting right acts of 1965, and the 26th amendment extension of the right

to vote to young people. these actions have marked progress towards our more perfect union. i believe this nomination can be another step along that path. judge sotomayor's journey to this hearing room is an historic story. she was raised by her mother, a nurse, in the south bronx. like her mother, sonia sotomayor worked hard. she graduated valedictorian of her class at a high school in new york. she was a member of just a third class at princeton university in which women were included. she continued to work hard, including reading classics unavailable to her when she was younger and engaged in tutoring to improve her writing. she graduated and was awarded

the senior pine prize for classic of glens and service to university. and i mention that that's an honor that's given for outstanding merit. after princeton, she attended law school. she chose to serve herself in the new york d.a. office and anyone that has been a prosecutor knows how hard that is. she prosecuted robberies, assaults, murders, and child pornography. then she served as a trial judge for six years. president clinton nominated her to serve more than ten years. she was confirmed each time by a majority in the senate.

judge sotomayor's qualifications are outstanding. she has more federal court jude digs experience than any nominee in nearly 100 years. she is the first nominee in well over a century to be nominated by three different judges and by three different presidents. she is the first nominee in 50 years to be serving as a federal judge and federal appellate judge. she'll be the only current supreme court justice to have served as a trial judge. she is a prosecutor and a lawyer in private practice. she brings a wealth of diversity and experience to the court. i hope all americans are encouraged by judge sotomayor's achievement and by her nomination to the nation's highest court. hers is a success story in which all, all americans can take

pride. those who break barriers often face the burden of overcoming prejudice. and it's been true in the supreme court. lead counsel for the naacp, legal defense fund, sat on the united states court of appeals and served as a nation's top lawyer. he won a remarkable 29 out of 32 cases before the supreme court but despite all of these qualifications and achievements, when he was before the senate for his confirmation, he was asked questions designed to embarrass him, questions such as, are you prejudice against the white people of the south. i hope that's a type of our past. confirmation justice lewis was a struggle right with that he was a radical.

talked about the jewish mind and like wise the first catholic nominee had overcome the argument as a catholic to be nominated by the pope. we are in a different era. i would trust that all members of this committee here today would reject the efforts of partisans and outside pressure groups that south to create a character and this extraordinary woman, her success, her understanding of the constitutional duties that she's faithfully performed for the last 17 years and i hope all senators would join together as they did when we considered reagan's confirmation, sandra day o'connor's nomination. there every republican and democrat confirmed her. this is an opportunity for

americans to see and here judge sotomayor for themselves and to consider her kwaum if i indications. it's the most transparent confirmation hearing ever held. her decisions and confirmation materials have been posted online and made publicly available. the record is significantly more complete and john roberts and samuel alito just a few years ago. the judge's testimony will be carried live on television stations and also live via webcast, something that i have set up for the judiciary committee website. my review of her judicial records leads me to believe that she's a careful and restrained judge with a deep respect for the judicial area and including the law and making role in the congress. that conclusion is supported by a number of independent studies that have been made of her

records. it shines through in a comprehensive review of her tough record of criminal cases. she has a deep understanding of the real lives of americans and the duty of law enforcement to help keep americans safe and responsibility of all of us to respect the freedoms that define america. now, unfortunately, someone south to twist her words in political attacks. pressure groups began attacking her even before the president made his selection. they stepped up her attacks and that's not the american way and should not be the senate way. and in truth we do not have to speculate about what kind of a justice she will be because we have seen what kind of a judge she has been. she is a judge which all americans can have confidence. she's been a judge for all

americans. she'll be a justice for all americans. her rank in republican on this committee confirmation process recently saying, what i found was the charges complying from right and left unsupported and false. it's very, very difficult for a nominee to push back. we have a high responsibility to base any criticism on a fair and honest statement of the facts and that nomination not be subjected to distortions of their records. i agree with senator sessions. as we proceed, let no one distort the judge's record. let's be fair to her and to the american people by not misrepresenting her views. we are a country bound together by our magnificent constitution. it guarantees the promises, the promises that our country will be a country based on the rule

of law. and our service as a federal judge, sonia sotomayor has kept face of that promise. she understands there is not one law from one race or a color. there's not one law for rich and poor. there's only one law and, judge, i remember so well, you sat in my office and you said that ultimately and completely a judge has to follow the law no matter what their upbringing has been. that's the kind of fair and impartial judging the american people expect. that's respect for the rule of law. that's the kind of judge that judge sotomayor has been, a fair and impartial justice she will be and that the american people deserve. judge sotomayor has been nominated to replace justice souter who's retirement last month left only eight justices. he served for nearly two decades and with a commitment to justice

and admiration for the law and understanding of the impact of the court's decisions on the daily lives of ordinary americans. i believe that judge sotomayor will be in the same mode, as sandra day o'connor, committed to the law and not ideology. in the weeks and months leading up to this hearing, i've heard on both sides of the aisle references being made to the engraving over the entrance of the supreme court. i look at that every time i go out there. it's carved in vermont marble and it says, people, justice, under law. judge sotomayor's nomination gives faith in those words. senator sessions? >> thank you, senator. i believe you set up the rules for the hearing are consistent with last hearing and i believe allow us to do our work together. i've enjoyed working with you on this process. i hope this will be viewed as the best hearing this committee

has ever had. why not? we should seek that. and the remarks and your family is proud and rightly so and i expect this hearing and resulting debate by respectful tone and discussion of serious issues, a thoughtful dialogue and maybe some disagreements for people who have worked hard from the beginning. i've been an active litigator as a federal prosecutor and a constitution of our great heritage of law that i care deeply about. they are the foundation of our prosperity and it's critical for two important reasons. first, and hold enormous power

and have a lifetime appointment. just five members can declare the meaning of our constitution bending or changing the meaning from what the people intended. second, this hearing is important and i believe our legal system is our dangerous cross roads. down one path is a traditional american system, so admired from around the world where a judge impartially applies the law without the regard to personal views. this is the compassionate system because it's the fair system and they do not make law or set policy because allowing unelected officials to make law would strike at the heart of the democracy. here judges take an oath to administer justices impartially. that reads, i do solemnly swear that i will administer justice without respect to person and to equal right to the rich and poor and that i will faithfully and

impartially discharge and perform all of the duties incumbent upon me under the constitution and laws of the united states so help me god. this gives the judicial system the moral authority which is why americans accept the ruling even when they disagree. it's based on a firm belief and objective truth, the trial is a process by which the impartial and wise judge guides us to truth. down the other path lie as brave new world where words have no true meaning and judges are there to decide which facts they choose to fee. i reject that view and americans reject that view. we have seen federal judges

force their political and social agenda on the nation dictating that the words under god be removed from the pledge of allegiance and barring students from even private, even silent prayer in schools. judges have a right to dismiss property, saying that a government can take a person's home for the purpose of developing a private shopping center. judges have, contrary to lond-standing rules of war, created a right for terrorists captured on a foreign battlefield to sue the united states government in our own country. judges have cited foreign laws and united resolutions to determine that a state law was unconstitutional. i'm afraid our system will only be further corrupted, i have to say, as a result of president obama's views that in some cases, the critical ingredient for a judge is "the depth and breadth of one's empathy," as

well as "their broader vision of what america should be." like the american people, i have watched this process for a number of years and i feel that this empathy standard is another step down the road to a where laws lose their fixed meanings and americans are seen as members of separate groups rather than as simply americans where the constitutional limits on government power are ignored when politicians want to buy out private companies. we've reached a fork in the road, i think, and there are stark differences. i want to be clear. i will not vote for and no senator should vote for an individual nominated by any president who is not fully committed to fairness and impartial al tea to every person who appears before them.

lee not vote for and no senator should vote for a nominee by any president acceptable for a judge to allow their personal background, prejudice, or sympathies to sway their decision in favor of or against parties before the court. in my view, such a philosophy is disqualifying. such an approach to judging means that the umpire calling the game is not mutual but instead feels empowered. call it sympathy, justice, whatever it is, it is not law. it's more akin to politics and politics has no place in the courtroom. some will respond judge sotomayor would never say it's acceptable for a judge to display prejudice in a case. but i regret to say, judge, that some of your statement from our outline seem to say that

clearly. let's look at just a few examples. we've seen the video of the duke university panel where judge sotomayor says, it's the court of appeals where policy is made and i know, i know, that this is on tape he should never say that and should not think that. and during a speech 15 years ago, judge sotomayor said, "i willingly accept a judge must not deny the difference resulting from experience and heritage but attempt continually to judge when those sympathies and prejudices are appropriate. in that same speech she said "my experiences will affect the facts i choose to see." having found a lot of cases,

that particular phrase bothers me. i expect every judge to see all of the facts. i think it's note worthy that when asked about sotomayor's famous statement that a wise latina would come to a better conclusion than others, president obama, white house press secretary robert gips and ginsburg declined to define the substance of those remarks. they each assumed that the nominee misspoke but i don't think -- but the nominee did not misspeak. she is on record of making this statement at least five times over the course of a decade. i am providing a copy of the full text of those speeches for the record. other also say that despite these statements we should look to a nominee's record which they characterize as moderate. people said the same of justice ginsburg, who is now considered to be one of the most actist members. focus on the nominee's judicial opinions and that is not a good

test because those cases were necessarily restrained by a president and the threat of reversal from higher courts. on the supreme court, those checks on judicial power will be removed and the judge's philosophy will be allowed to reach full bloom. but even as the lower court judge our nominee has made some troubled rulings. i'm concerned about the new haven case recently reversed where pro the motion rules in the middle of the game. increditly her opinion contained one substantive analysis. she accepts that her opinions, sympathies, and prejudices will affect her rulings. could it be that her time as a leader in the pourt rican defense and education fund, a

fine organization, provides a clue to her decision against the firefighters? while a nominee with a share of that committee, the organization aggressively pursued racial quotas in city hiring and in numerous cases fought to overturn the results of a promotion exams t seems to me that in ricci, her sympathy for one group of firefighters turned out to be prejudice against the other. that is, of course, the logical flaw in the empathy standard. empathy towards one party is always prejudiced against another. judge sotomayor, we will inquire into how your philosophy, which allowed objectivity in the courtroom will affect your decision making. like, for example, in abortion where an organization of which you were an active leader argued that the constitution requires taxpayer money to fund abortion and gun control where you

recently noted that the second amendment does not prevent a city or state from barring gun ownership. private property where you've ruled recently that the government can take property from one pharmacy developer and give it to another. capital punishment where you personally signed a statement opposing the statement of a death penalty in new york because of the inhuman psychological burden it places on the offender and the family. so i hope the american people will follow these hearings closely. they should learn about the irons and listen to both sides of the argument. and at the end of the hearing ask, if i must one day go to court, what kind of judge do i wish to hear my case? do i want a judge that allows his or her social political or religious views to change the outcome or do i want a judge that impartially applies the law to the facts and fairly rules on the merits without bias or prejudice? it's our job to determine which side of that fundamental divide

the nominee stands. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. another housekeeping -- >> judge sessions, the republican ranking member of the top republican on the senate judiciary committee, himself a former judge with very strong words outlining a theme that he and no doubt other republican also focus on during the course of the questioning of judge sotomayor that simply put, some of her comments are not appropriate for a united states supreme court justice. specifically, the comment now widely publicized that she made at the university of california, berkeley, school of law where she said, i would hope that a wise latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life. jeff toobin, let me start with you. were you surprised with how robust judge sessions' comments

were? >> i was. what's worth thinking about here is that there's an issue before the supreme court now that's going to dominate these proceedings just below the radar. which is, does the constitution allow affirmative action anymore? does the constitution allow a police department or a fire department to consider race as one factor in promotions? that issue really separates the liberals and the conservatives. sotomayor will be asked about that. chief justice roberts is making a big push on the court to create no more room for affirmative action under the constitution and i think that's just something to think about as we move forward. >> and the whole issue of empathy came in as well, whether that would be appropriate. >> this is, of course, an issue raised by president obama before he asked sotomayor to join the supreme court. he said he wants a judge with

empathy and you heard today from senator sessions saying, i don't care what you call it, but i don't think it's appropriate. such a philosophy is disqualifying. now, you can look back to the confirmation hearings of judge alito, for example, republican confirmed him. he was the republican nominee. and -- of george w. bush and he talked about how his italian heritage informs everything that he does. but the point senator sessions was making is that there's a difference in your background in forming what you do or swaying your judicial decision. >> maria, you're a wise latina woman. tell us why that comment, from your perspective, would be appropriate. >> why i'm upset with senator sessions is that he basically said that empathy equals prejudice, that somehow if you have any set of experiences that might open you up to considering

different percent spespectives facts, that somehow that's a bias. you don't leave your background. you are who you are. and all that she was saying was, she's got some experiences that are different than some of the other people on the bench and this is why we have -- >> a matter of human nature, alex, people come with different life experiences and as much as you want to be objective and fair and responsible, you can't completely always, if you're a human being, ignore all of that. >> certainly it's tough to do. but the question is, does she put her finger on the scales of justice to favor one group or another. and there seem to be some cases, the ricci case, the affirmative action case where, that has come into action. would she do that on the supreme court when there's no other elements to restrain her.

it's like a referee in football saying, i'm not going to call it by the fairness on the field. i'm going to call it by the impact on the team and maybe they worked hard, harder than the other team, and i'm going to give them that extra inch. that's not the referees judge or the justice's job. >> we are just getting started for the nomination hearings. it's anticipated that she will be confirmed. we'll have more at cnn.com. we'll take a break and the hearings will continue right after this. ...are actually susceptible to irreversible damage. your teeth are no different. everyday acids can cause irreversible loss of enamel. new crest pro-health enamel shield protects against... ...enamel loss by forming a micro-thin shield against acid attack. only crest pro-health toothpastes...

...protect all these areas dentists check most. save your enamel. once it's gone, it can be gone for good. new crest pro-health enamel shield. also shield with the rinse. getting up early, packing lunches and running for the bus. and we're ready for it. because we took all our lists and we went to walmart. since walmart checks other store's prices... i didn't have to. that means we got home in time... for just a little more summer -- and for one last night of lightning bugs. back to school costs less at walmart. save money. live better. walmart.

...is to create it. [ female announcer ] discover the power to create a new future for your skin. only aveeno positively radiant moisturizer has total soy, combining the best of nature with the proof of science for a whole new level of radiance. it's clinically proven to visibly reduce blotchiness, brown spots and other past damage while breakthrough spf 30 helps prevent future damage. healthier, more radiant skin. it's in your future now. [ female announcer ] positively radiant. the beauty of nature and science. only from aveeno. a day on the days that you have arthritis pain,

you could end up taking 4 times the number... of pills compared to aleve. choose aleve and you could start taking fewer pills. just 2 aleve have the strength... to relieve arthritis pain all day. orrin hatch of utah getting ready to make his opening statements. >> >> i am confident that for

you, chairman, and ranking member of this hearing will be both respectful and substantive. judge sotomayor comes to this committee for the third time having served in the first two levels of the federal judiciary and now being nominated to the third. she has a compelling life story. her nomination speaks to the opportunities that provides for men and women of different background and heritage. the liberty that we enjoy makes this possible and requires our best efforts to protect that liberty. it depends on a written constitution that limits and separates government power, self government by the people and the rule of law. those principles define the law that our liberty requires. they define the roles that the

justices provide. and i ask to have a constitution as a playbook for judicial selection be placed in the record, mr. chairman, if i can. >> without objection. >> my approach includes three elements. first, the senate owes some difference to the president's qualified nominees. second, a judicial nominees qualifications include not only legal experience but, more importantly, judicial philosophy. by that i mean a nominee's understanding of the power and proper role of judges in our system of government. third, this standard must be applied to the nominee's entire record. i've also found guidance from what may seem to be an unusual source. on june 8th, 2005, then senator barack obama explained his opposition to the appeals court of janice rogers brown, an african-american woman with a

truly compelling life story who then served as a justice on the california supreme court. senator obama made three arguments that i find relevant today. first, he argued that the test of a qualified judicial nominee is whether she can set aside her personal views and, as he put it "decide each case on the facts and the merits alone. that is what our founders intended and it has to be based on evidence and on facts. they have to be based on precedent and on law." second, senator obama extensively reviewed justice brown's speeches off the court for what he called her "overreaching judicial philosophy." this is, after all, a nomination to the supreme court of the united states of america. judge sotomayor, if confirmed, will help change the very precedence that today bind her as a circuit court appeals

judge. this is quite different than the judicial position that she now occupies. this makes evidence outside of her appeals court decisions regarding her to judging more, not less important. judge sotomayor has obviously thought, spoken, and written much on these issues and i think we show respect to her by taking her entire record seriously. third, senator obama said that, while a nominee's race, gender, and life story are important, they cannot distract from the fundamental focus on the kind of judge she will be. he said then, as i've said today, that we should all be grateful for the opportunity that our liberty affords for americans of different background. we should applaud judge sotomayor's achievement and her service, her to the country.

yet called sin any cal to substantive views. he approved it twice to filibuster judge brown's nomination and then voted against her confirmation. i share her hope that we have arrived at ap point in our history where individuals can be examined and criticized about their views no matter what their race or gender. if that was appropriate now when president obama is choosing his own nominees. but today president obama says that empathy is critical in decisions. today we ignore the speeches all together and focus on her judicial decisions, which are extensive. i do not believe that we should do just that. i wish that other current standards have been applied to the past nominees. democratic senator, for example,

offers proof of judge sotomayor's nomination and second circuit colleagues 95% of the time. joined by then for which i congratulate her. joined by then senator obama, however, many of those same democratic senators voted against justice samuel alito's confirmation, even though he voted with his democrat appointed third circuit in the colleagues, 99% of the time. during a much longer appeals court career. and although justice alito reeved the aba highest rating and then senator obama filibustered the decision. in fact, senator obama never voted to confirm a supreme court justice. he even voted against the man who administered the oath of presidential office, chief justice john roberts, another

distinguished and well-qualified nominee. now, if the compelling life story, academic, and personal excellence make a con vinesing confirmation case, estrata is a respected lawyer, one of the top supreme court prakt tigs ner in america. ones who today say these same factors should count in judge sotomayor's favor. now, whether i vote for or against judge sotomayor, it will be by applying the principles that i've laid out, not using such tactics used against the nominees in the past. judicial appointments have been extensive. some of the things said about judge sotomayor have been unfair. there are now newspaper reports that left-wing groups, the

extreme left people for the american way are engaged in a smear campaign against the plaintiff in one of her more controversial cases, a man who will be testifying here later in the week. if that is true, and i hope it is not, it is beneath both the contempt and dignity that this process demands there. must be a vigorous debate about the kind of judge america needs because nothing less than our liberty is at stake. most judges set aside and judges consider their personal feelings in deciding cases, judicial impartiality a duty or an option? does the fact that it affects so many people's lives require judges to be objective and impartial or does it allow them to be subjective and sympathetic? judge sotomayor's nomination raises these and other important issues and i look forward to a respectful and energetic debate. the confirmation process, in general, and this hearing in

particular, must be both dignified and thorough. there are very different and strongly held views about the issues that we will explore. in particular, the role that the judge should play in our system of government. the task before us is to determine whether judge sotomayor is qualified by legal experience and judicial philosophy that set on the supreme court of the united states of america. doing so requires examining her entire record, her speeches and articles as well as her judicial decisions. we must, at the same time, be thankful for the opportunity, represented by judge sotomayor's nomination and focus squarely on whether she will be the kind of judge required by the very liberty that makes that opportunity possible. judge, i am proud of you and i wish you well. this will be an interesting experience and i expect to be treated with dignity and respect

throughout. thank you, mr. chairman. >> all right. so that was orrin hatch a. key republican on the senate judiciary committee a. long-time senator making it clear that he's going to have tough questions for judge sotomayor. even though he seems to be sympathetic to her nomination, let's bring in candy crowley. a lot of people were looking to orrin hatch to find out whether he would be voting for or against judge sotomayor. did you get a sense one way or the other? >> i think this was more of a tonal speech that he gave saying that, here's what we need to look at. we need to be serious and respectful and also i'd like to complain about how some republican president nominees have been treated. it's possible to overestimate to determine how many of the --

nominees were treated oregon rin hatch was one of those republicans that said that. so i suspect he will vote for her. >> and i expect, jeff toobin, that we'll be hearing from a lot of the other republicans voted about how they dealt with. >> yes, but hatch really did seem undecided. i'm looking for lindsey graham, also generally undecided. those are the two republicans that i think are the most likely possible -- >> members of the judiciary committee? >> yes. >> because there are others likely to vote in favor of her confirmation. >> yes. >> and the question is, does the senate owe difference to any qualify nominee? and he made it very clear that barack obama in the speech on the senate floor on the nomination of samuel alito said, i have no doubt that judge alito has the training and

qualifications necessary to serve but he voted against him. >> guys, we're going to take a quick break. these are historic hearings. confirmation of the supreme court justice nominee will continue right after this. carol! denise! you've lost weight! it's just all these giant things make me look small. i eat this fiber one yogurt. (mr. mehta) it has five grams of fiber, zero fat, and fifty calories. please, this is too creamy and delicious. it's true, only fifty calories. (announcer) fiber one yogurt. it's true, only fifty calories. the $100 cream.

flabbergasted when we creamed the $700 cream! for under $30 regenerist micrm hydrates better than 32 of the world's most expensive creams. fantastic. phenomenal. regenerist. hi, may i help you? yeah, i'm looking for car insurance that isn't going to break the bank. you're in the right place. only progressive gives you the option to name your price. here. a price gun? mm-hmm. so, i tell you what i want to pay. and we build a policy to fit your budget. that's cool.

uh... [ gun beeps ] [ laughs ] i feel so empowered. power to the people! ha ha! yeah! the option to name your price -- new and only from progressive. call or click today.

the confirmation hearings of judge sotomayor continuing the senator of california, senator feinstein. during the break there was a little bit of an outburst is it and someone was removed. the chairman, patrick leahy and judge sessions were firm in saying that they will not tolerate any outburst during the

course of these hearings. let's go to dianne feinstein. >> the court cannot restrict access to abortions that are medically necessary to protect a woman's health. some assure that roe and casey were entitled to great respect and in one of the hearings, through questioning by senator spector, this line of cases was acknowledged to have created a super precedence. but once on the court, the same nominees voted to overturn the key holding in casey that laws restricting a woman's medical care must contain an exception to protect her health. their decision did not comport with the answers they gave here and a disregard of the precedence established in roe,

ashcroft, casey and super precedence went out the window and women lost a fundamental constitutional protection that had existed for 36 years. also, it showed me the supreme court justices are much more than umpires calling balls and strikes and that the word activist is often used only to describe opinions of one side. as a matter of fact, in just two years the same nominees have either disregarded or overturned precedence in at least eight other cases. a case involving assignment to attain racial diversity in school assignments, a case overruling 70 years of precedence on the federal amendment and gun control law, a case of age discrimination, a

case allowing manufacturers to set minimum prices for their products and a case overruling two cases from the 1960s on time limits for filing criminal appeals, a case reversing precedence on the sixth amendment right to counsel. a case on issue ads relating to political campaigns and a case regarding prior law and creating a new standard that limits when cities can replace civil service exams, that they may believe have been discriminated against a group of workers. so i do not believe that supreme court justices are merely umpires calling balls and strikes. rather, i believe that they make the decisions of individuals who bring to the court their own experiences and philosophies. judge sotomayor, i believe you

are a warm and intelligent woman. i believe you are well-studied and experienced in the law with some 17 years of federal court experience involving 3,000 appeals and 450 trial cases. so i believe you, too, will bring your experience and philosophy to this highest court and i believe that will do only one thing and that is strengthen this high institution of our great country. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator feinstein. >> all right. we're going to continue our coverage of these historic confirmation hearings. we just heard from dianne feinstein. several more republicans and democrats getting ready to deliver their opening statement. and then at the end of that, we'll hear from sonia sotomayor herself. our coverage continues right after this. imodium multi-symptom relief p) combines two powerful medicines for fast relief of your diarrhea symptoms,

so you can get back out there. imodium. get back out there. are enjoying the new palm pre with its revolutionary web os. they're running multiple live applications at the same time. - ( thunder and rain ) - 3 million are using the simply everything plan. each is saving $1200 - over an at&t iphone plan. - ( cash register dings ) together that's over $3 billion. - enough to open a dunkin' donuts in space. - ( walkie-talkie sounds ) from america's most dependable 3g network. bringing you the first and only wireless 4g network. get the palm pre from sprint. only on the now network. deaf, hard of hearing and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com. mr. evans? this is janice from onstar. i have received an automatic signal you've been in a front-end crash. do you need help? yeah. i'll contact emergency services and stay with you. you okay? yeah.

onstar. standard for one year on 14 chevy models. (groans) a lot of people are gonna be kicking themselves for not buying in this market. (woman) visit remax.com where you can see all the listings in thousands of cities and towns. where do you want to be? (announcer) get colorful fruit of the loom underwear for the family at unbeatable prices. save money. live better. walmart. good choice. only meineke lets you choose the brake service that's right for you. and save 50% on pads and shoes. meineke.

we are continuing with the confirmation hearings. chuck grassley is speaking. the new surgeon general of the united states, dr. regina at 11:40. >> good judges understand that they must not invoke their own personal opinions of right and wrong. they know that their job is to say what the law is rather than

what they personally think it ought to be. good judges understand that they must meticulously apply the rules and laws even though it may be unpopular. good judges know that the law constrains judges every bit as much as they restrain legislatures, executives and good judges not only understand these fundamental principles, they live and breathe them. president obama said that he would nominate judges based on their ability to empathize in general and with certain groups in particular. this empathy standard is troubling to me. in fact, i'm concerned that judging based on empathy is really just legislatively from the bench.

the constitution requires that judges be free from personal politics. president obama's empathy standard appears to encourage judges to make use of their personal politics, feelings, and preferences. this is contrary to what most of us understand to be the role of the judiciary. president obama clearly believes that you measure up to his empathy standard. that worries me. i've reviewed your record and have concerns about your judicial philosophy. for example, in one speech you doubted that a judge could ever be truly impartial. in another speech you argued that it is a disservice to both law and society for judges to disregard personal views shaped by ones quote, unquote, of women or men of a different color. in yet another speech you proclaimed that the court of appeals is where policy is made.

your wise latina comment goes directly to your views of how a judge should use his or her background when deciding cases. unfortunately, i fear they don't comport with what i believe and many others believe is an appropriate method. personal preferences and biases should be left at the door. just like lady justice, judges and justices must wear blindfolds when administering justice. i'll be asking your ability to wear that blindfold and your

ability to decide cases in an impartial manner and in accordance with the constitution. i'll be asking you about your judicial policy, whether you will allow biases to dictate your judicial methods. finally, or ideally, the supreme court should not be made up of men or women on one side of a group or issue. whether, the supreme court should be made up of man or woman on the side of the law and the constitution. i'm looking to support a restrained jurist committed to the rule of law and the constitution. i'm not looking to support a creating jurist who will allow his or her background and personal preferences to decide cases. the senate needs to do its job in conducting comprehensive and careful review of your record and qualifications. you are nominated to a lifetime position on the highest court. the senate has a tremendous

responsibility to confirm an individual who has superior intellectual abilities and an even judicial demeanor and temperment. above all, we have tremendous responsibility to confirm an individual who truly understands the proper role of a justice. so i'll be asking you questions about your qualifications however, i'm committed to giving you a fair and committed hearing as appropriate for supreme court nominees. i congratulate you once again. >> thank you, senator grassley. senator feingold. >> thank you. >> senator feingold is starting and i want to -- i want to play for you