i've had the chance to review judge sotomayor's record in 1998, the senate voted to promote judge sotomayor to the appellate court. i voted against her at that time because i was concerned not about her background, not about her qualification, i was concerned that she embraced an activist judicial philosophy, and that's what i want to talk about. because that's what your deciding when you put something on -- somebody on the supreme court. what is the judicial philosophy that this person carries with them? it's not necessarily about their own back ground, it's not necessarily about their qualifications. those are important to review. but at the heart what is -- heart what is the judicial philosophy? is this a person that supports an activist judiciary, getting into areas where many of the public don't think they should go into or is it a person that believes in a constructionist view that a court there 0 to be an umpire, is this a ball or strike and not how do we do law, how do we rewrite what is here? and i think the court loses its luster when it gets into becoming an active player in poli

judge sotomayor's story, mr. president, is a classic american story about what is possible in our country through hard work. she grew up in her own words in modest and challenging circumstances and she worked hard for every single thing she got. many of you know her story. her dad died when she was nine years old and her mom sported her and her brother by herself. her mom was devoted to her children's education. in fact, her mom was so devoted to her education and her brother's education that she actually saved every penny she could so she could buy e encyclopedia britannicas for her kids and this really meant a lot to meevment i remember growing up, thencyclopedia britannicas in the hallway were like in a hallowed place. i now show my daughter who is 13 and these are from the 1960's. she doesn't seem very interested in them, but they meant a lot to our family and they clearly meant a lot to judge sotomayor. she graduated from princeton summa cum laude and f.b.i. bet at that kappa and was one of two people to win

they spoke about judge sonia sotomayor and i could not them but think as i reviewed judge sotomayor's record in preparation for a confirmation hearing on july 13, i reviewed that was what all senators were doing. i was struck by her extraordinary career and how she has excelled in everything she has done. i know how proud her mother salinea, a registered nurse is of her accomplishments. this goes across political lines. i was glad to hear laura bush, the former first laid combri say recently she too is proud that president obama nominated a woman to serve on the supreme court. you know, i -- i recall that justice ginsberg since she was cheered by the announcement that she is glad she is no longer going to be the lone woman on the court. i contrast this to president bush's nomination naming of justice o'connor's successor a few years ago when justice o'connor conceded her disappointment because she was leaving and not replaced by another woman, the percentage of women on the supreme court dropped by 50%. now, sandra day o'connor, justice ruud baader ginsberg weren't being discriminator

now, similar to judge sotomayor, mr. koh highlights a trend which i think we see in some of president obama's nominees. they have impressive backgrounds, they're -- but when their records are examined in more detail, there are substantive questions about their understanding of the constitution. for example, mr. koh has said repeatedly, including at his confirmation hearing, that he believes the congressionally authorized 2003 u.s. invasion of iraq -- and i quote -- "violated international law" because the united states had not received -- and i quote -- "explicit united nations authorization" beforehand. he's also said that the united states supreme court should -- quote -- "tip more decisively toward a transnationallist jurisprudence." as opposed to basing their decisions on the united states constitution and laws made pursuant to it. his views on the second amendment are also extremely worrisome. in a speech called "a world drawing in guns," which was given at fordham university law school in 2002 and later published i

sotomayor's record. i'd like to hear more from her on the scope of the second amendment to the constitution an whether americans -- and whether americans can count on her to uphold one of the fundamental liberties enshrined in the bill of rights, the right to keep and bear arms. i'd also like to hear more from judge sotomayor on the scope of the fifth amendment and whether the government can take private property from one person and give it to another person based on some elastic definition of public use. and i want to hear more from her on her thoughts on the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment of the constitution, which reads in part: no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. obviously the third issue is going to be very much in the news, probably again as soon as next monday when the supreme court hands down its decision in the ricky vs. destafano case, a case in which judge sotomayor participated on the panel before her court of appeals. tha

judge sotomayor comes with one of the longest 10ures of any judge mom -- tenures of any judge nominated to the united states supreme court on the federal bench for about 17 years, so there's a rather lectsdzy record to -- lengthy record to review. in addition, she's given many speeches and written law review articles and made other statements that deserves our attention. she has responded to the questionnaire sent by the senate judiciary committee and there are other followup questions which i anticipate she'll be answering in the coming weeks. so our review is ongoing in anticipation of a confirmation hearing begin july the 13th, in the senate judiciary committee. but so far it's fair to say there are a number of issues that have come up which i would like to talk about briefly that i anticipate she will have an opportunity to clarify or otherwise respond to and make her position clear for the american people and for the senate. as we perform our constitutional obligation under the article 2, section 2 of the constitution -- madam president the most -- most of the focus during a judici

now i'd like to talk a little bit about judge sotomayor's philosophy. as dan mentioned in the introduction, i've argued a number of case, five appeals before judge sotomayor. when i was in the justice department, i ran a branch that was before her a lot. she was on my mind certainly in the last few weeks, i spent a lot of time immersing myself in her opinions, trying to get a sense of how she thinks about the law and the constitution. of course it's always somewhat difficult, i think, at this stage to predict with 100% certainty how a sitting judge would act if confirmed to the supreme court. that's so for a number of reasons. one is that, of course, you're dealing with a relatively small sample size in the sense that it's not as though she has had dozens of decisions addressing, you know, the abortion issue, gun control, things of that nature. you're working from a small sample size. the other complicating factor is that a court of appeals judge is, in theory, bound by supreme court precedent. there's always the possibility that a judge, when elevated

judge sotomayor clearly shares in that judge. i'm somewhat surprised but it's true as i will discuss. her vision seems to be we should change our laws or listen to other laws and judges in sort -- and so the of merge them with the foreign law. that is the overt opinion. mr. koh who was just nominated and confirmed to the chief counsel of the u.s. state department, mr. koh is quite open about it, shockingly, really. i suggest if we become transnational we suffer two blows to our legal system. first the laws we are subject to would not be laws made by us. this would remind us of the boston tea party. the colonies objected to paying taxes but not just any taxes. they objected because the taxes were being imposed on them by the british parliament and they didn't have a voice in it. the complaint was taxation without representation. thus, the moral power of the american law to compel obedience arises from the people's choice to enact it in the first place, that moral authority is undermined when we allow foreign law we had nothing to

she was asked about judge sonia sotomayor. what she said was, she was asked when you retire, you will like a woman to replace you. you were disappointed when a woman did not replace you. what is your reaction to the nomination of sonia sotomayor? she said, i am pleased that we will have another woman on the court. i do think it is important not to have just one. our nearest neighbor, canada, also has a court of nine members. in canada, there is a woman chief justice, and four women also on the canadian court. she was asked, do you think there is a right number of women who should be on the court? she said no, of course not. then she pointed out that half of all law graduates are women today. we have a tremendous number of qualified women in the country who are serving as lawyers. they should be represented on the court. she was also asked about opponents of sonia sotomayor who never brought up the term activist judge. i know this is a term that you have railed against in the past. would you object to about the term? >> i do no

what does this mean about our judge sotomayor would approach death penalty cases? i think she has a firm death -- affirmed death penalty cases, but on the supreme court that's different ability to redefine cases, and these personal views of her could very well affect that. recently five justices of the supreme court decided, based in part of their review of rulings of courts of foreign countries, that the constitution says that the united states cannot execute a violent criminal if he is 17 years of -- 17 years and 364 days old when he willfully premeditatedly killed someone. they say that the constitution says that the state who has a law to that effect cannot do it. looking -- quote -- "to revalving standards of -- revalving standards of decency that mark a maturing society," close quote, this is what the court said as they set about their duty to set the supreme court, five members of the supreme court, four dissents said looking to -- quote -- "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." close quote. we conclude the death penalt

it will be interesting to see whether the sotomayor confirmation plays out in that rcht. there is an old saw in washington circles about advising a nominee that they need to follow an 80/20 rule. what that means is that you need to make sure the senators are speaking for 80% of the time and you are not speaking for more than 20% of the time because if you are, your nomination is in trouble. it will be interesting to see if that plays out. i said a moment ago the hearings have become increasingly politicized and partisan, which is regrettable. we saw in the bork nominations this play out but in the 1990's, namely in the contexts of the two clinton appoint's where a lot of sectors where able to put partisanship aside. when clinton nominated ginsburg, here was a woman clearly qualified, distinguished background, at the time a judge on the d.c. circuit and even though many senators disagreed with her philosophically, nonetheless they said look, elections have consequences, presidents are entitled to appoint the nominee who shares their views, and at the end of the day the vot

a review of judge sotomayor's writings and rulings make a point. a 2002 article in the berkley la raza law journal has received a good deal of attention already for her troubling assertion that her gender and ethnicity would enable her to reach a better result that a man of different ethnicity. they say it was inarticle that it was taken out of context. we've sense learned, however, that she's made similar assertions. other comments that sotomayor made in the say law review article underscore rather than alleviate concerns with this particular approach to judging. she questioned the principle that judges should be neutral and said that the principle of impartiality is a mere aspiration that she's that she's skeptical judges can achieve in all or even in most cases. or even in most cases. madam president, i find it extremely troubling that judge sotomayor would question whether judges have the capacity to be neutral even in most cases. there's more. a few years after the publication of this particular law review article, judge sotomayor said the cou

judge sotomayor is no stranger to this chamber. she was nominated first for the district court bench by president george herbert walker bush and then nominated for the district court by president clinton, and that's an indication that we have seen her work before, we are aware of her background. the last point i would make, and consistent with the senator from california, is that judge delayed could be justice denied. in this case, if we continue this hearing for a record-breaking period of time, which has been requested by the republican side, it will mean that we will have a vacancy on the supreme court when it begins its important work this fall. what chairman leahy has asked for is reasonable. it is consistent with the way judges were treated under president bush at the time the republicans had no objection or complaint about it. this is a reasonable timetable and i urge my colleagues to support chairman leahy. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume

judge sotomayor decided it should be uphold. it went to the supreme court, i think there's a likelihood the court is going to reverse the second circuit. i think that the ritchie case raises concerns on a number of fronts. one is it does appear the case was wrongly decided. chief justice roberts quite correctly said, the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. another reason that it raises concern is the way it was issue the second circuit court issued the decision as an unpublished, summary order and didn't engage in merits of the wailingty constitutional issues at stake. this is a criticism lodged by another clinton appointee on the second circuit who expressed deep concern that the way the panel handled it wasn't appropriate under the circumstances, given, again, the very important constitutional issues that were at stake. the fact that the case had been brief and argued extensively. i very much expect that this is a decision that will be front and center in the confirma

judge sotomayor comes to this position but with an extraordinary record. her academic standing at princeton was summa cum laude, a graduate of the yale law school, where she was a member of the board of editors. then in her practice, she was an assistant district attorney in manhattan, a position which gives very extensive experience in many important facets of the law, something i know from my own experience years ago as an assistant district attorney. then she was in private practice on -- with a very prestigious new york law firm. then served on the united states district court. and more recently on the court of appeals for the second circuit. the hearings will give judge sotomayor an opportunity to respond to a number of issues which have been raised about her background. i think that chairman leahy was correct in moving the hearing date so that the confirmation process could be concluded in time for judge sotomayor, if confirmed, to sit with the court during september when the court will decide what cases it will hear. a great deal of the important wo

in the needs of the president who nominated judge sotomayor. but less we forget serves the needs of the nominee herself, who is a judge and will only be able to speak publicly about her record when the hearings are weaned. -- convened. convened. madam president, this is important obligation that we as members of the senate take on, and there are only 101 people who get a direct say in the nomination an confirmation of the united states -- the justice of the united states supreme court. first and foremost, of course, the president of the united states, and in this case, president obama consulted with numerous senators, republicans and democrats alike prior to making his nomination. then once the nomination is made, the 100 members of the united states senate have to stand in for 300 million americans in deciding who will get that lifetime appointment. i voted on every single member in the united states senate currently as well as some in the past and i know how important an obligation that is. the justice who take justice souter's place also nee

now, first on judge sotomayor. several of my colleagues from across the aisle have come to the floor today to attack judge sotomayor's nomination to the supreme court, and i must say, i think these attacks are entirely misplaced. i've always had a consistent standard for evaluating judicial nominees. i use it when voting for them. i use it when joining in in the nomination process, as i did under president bush and continue to under president obama. and those three standards are excellence, moderation, and diversity. i am confident that judge sotomayor meets these criteria, based on my review thus far of her lengthy and impressive record on both the district court and court of appeals, her impressive career in both public and private sectors and her stellar academic credentials. i've also been deeply impressed with her personal story, a true story of an american dream. she pulled herself up from the projects in the bronx to stand before this body as a nominee to the highest court in the land. her history is truly i

. -- a band did judge sotomayor. -- than did judge sotomayor let me put it this way, i wish she had been similarly restrained on these issues. these are among the most important issues and questions that her record raises and which must be addressed at her hearing. this is a fair way of letting her know in advance that this is an important issue to a majority of senators in the u.s. senate and, certainly, the majority of the people in this country. we will expect her to tell us what her real feelings are on this and what she believes a lot really should say. -- balad really should say. -- trhhe law really should say. and we will give her a chance to address this. >> the questions here about the second amendment really bring up the question about whether the constitution still applies to all americans. president obama, before he was president, suggested in interviews that he saw the -- the constitution as incomplete, as a charter of-liberties -- of negative liberties, that it told the government would could not do, but did not tell the government what it had to do on behalf of the people.

people are being very deceptive by saying it was only sonia sotomayor. what she did was applied the law as it was written. when it was sent to the supreme court, instead of sending it back, they said, ok, what you should do is relook at the situation. 60% of the test was a multiple choice. in other words, i give you a question and you have three answers. it is not what you would call a good test to be a fireman. host: thank you, charles. caller: he made a lot of good points and i agree with everything he said. one thing we can pull out of his comment about the man's dyslexia and "the washington times" editorial was that this was an incredibly sympathetic plaintiff. the city of new haven made the biggest mistake messing with frank. this was a dyslexic guy. he used his own money to study and prepare for this test. you cannot look at him and say that he did not deserve it. he really, really did. one of the things that is really fascinating -- i mentioned this before. one of the things that happened -- ginsburg makes this point in her dissent. she said, he i

, judge sotomayor nomination. i talked with the distinguished ranking member last week on this, on this schedule, and i would note the concerns he'd raised. but i'm announcing today that the senate judiciary committee will hold the confirmation hearing on the nomination of judge sonia sotomayor to be an associate justice of the united states supreme court on july 13th. this is a reasonable schedule. it'll be the middle of next month. it's in line with past experience, it's going to allow several more weeks for committee members to prepare for the hearing, several more weeks that if i'd held the hearing this month, and there's no reason to unduly delay consideration of this well-qualified nominee. and she deserves the opportunity to go before the public and speak of her record, especially as some have mischaracterized her record, misstated her record. the only place she can speak, madam president, the only place she can speak and speak of her record is in a hearing. but it's also a reasonable schedule that serves t

i was not familiar with the jet sonia sotomayor before she was nominated. -- with judge sonia sotomayor before she was nominated. i started looking at her rsume. there -- resume. there are so many things that are so amazing. you can get distracted about where she went to school enter several levels of the federal bench. she had a very big job in a complex litigation and a law firm. the part of her resume this book to me was our time is a district attorney in new york. i do not know that most americans truly understand the difference between a state prosecuting attorney in a federal prosecuting attorney. those of us who have spent time in the courtroom like to explain that we are the ones who answer the 911 call. as a state prosecutor, you do not get to pick the cases you try. you try all of the cases. when a state prosecutor, you do not have the luxury of a large staff or a light case load. it would be unheard of for a federal prosecutor to have a case load of 100 felonies at any given time. that is the case load that this nominee handled as an a cystic district attorney -- as an assist

caller: i do not understand what the republican trouble is with judge sonia sotomayor. they voted for her in the lower circuits. they voted with president bush and then with bill clinton. all of the sudden, barack obama printer in, and did bring up -- barack obama brings her in , i think it is a pretty good statistic. i do not care what color you are. host: do you think the stakes are different when you're talking about a lower position versus the? supreme? caller: no, the qualification still has to be there. we are calling her stupid and she was second at prisoprinceto. host: dahlia lithwick? caller: i agree. this is a judge was 17 years of judicial experience. she is the most qualified person to be tapped for the supreme court in 100 years if you look at judicial experience. if you look at her record, as i have been doing, there is not a lot to be alarmed by. progressives will say there is not that much to be cheered by. she is an incredible, moderate, careful, scrupulous, slightly boring, hospital corners judge who sticks to their records and sticks to the facts. she

and another woman would be a plus there, if judge sotomayor is confirmed. and also the diversity on being hispanic is important. we live in a very diverse society. when you see that small supreme court chamber, you can see the intimacy and you can see the -- almost visualize the intellectual discussions and the powerhouses in that room, and how the really big cases are decided with the court having the last word on life and death, a woman's right to choose, medicinal issues of attempted suicide, the death penalty in capital cases and all of the cutting-edge issues of our society. so the confirmation proceeding of judge sotomayor will give us an opportunity to inquire into some very important issues on executive versus judicial authority, on the authority of the court versus the congress, and toward that end, i wrote a letter to justice sotomayor -- judge sotomayor dated june 15, and i ask unanimous consent that this letter be included in the record at the conclusion of my statement. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. specter: as i note in the ope

they spoke about judge sonia sotomayor, and i could not help but think as i reviewed judge sotomayor's record in preparation for her confirmation hearing on july 13, a review that i would assume all senators are doing, i was struck by her extraordinary career and how she's excelled at everything she's done. i know how proud her mother, selina, a registered nurse, is of her accomplishments. and i was delighted to -- this goes across political lines. i was delighted to hear laura bush, the foreman first lad they recently too she's proud president obama nominated a woman to serve on the supreme court. you know, i -- i recall that justice ginsburg said she was cheered by the announcement and that she's glad she's no longer going to be the lone woman out of nine members of the court. now, i contrast this to reaction to president bush's naming of justice o'connor's successor a few years ago when justice o'connor conceded her disappointment because when she was leaving and not replaced by another woman, the percentage of women on the supreme court dropped by 50%. now, sandra day o'connor and

the president has nominated judge sotomayor. it is the senate's job to give . constitution convention, senators -- and i quote -- "cannot themselves choose, they can only ratify or reject the choice of the president." i take this role very seriously as do all of my other colleagues. one of our colleagues in the senate at the time gave the following views on a then a pending supreme court nomination. i want to tell you what he said. he said there aren't some who believe that the president should have complete authority to appoint his nominee and the senate should only see if the nominee is an all-around good person. there should be no further question as to whether the judge should be confirmed. i disagree with you. i agree for early -- firmly that the constitution confirms fort examination of the judge's philosophy, ideology, and record. the senator who made those remarks was then a senator obama. he spoke those words in january 2006 on this floor when the senate was debating the confirmation of justice alito. it is our duty to thoroughly review all of the nomi

i believe it's judge sotomayor, not the justices scalia and thomas, who are wrong. under her approach, a yuj is free -- has free rein to survey the world to find what they might consider to be good ideas, and then impose these views on the american people calling it "law." however, this is not the american system. our system requires judges to adhere to this constitution. to the statutes and to the legal precedent, to the end that justices follow the will of the people of our country, as expressed in our law. the constitution says we do ordain and establish this constitution of the united states, not some other. judges aren't free to amend it by citing some other foreign constitution. i think this is a big deal. so they're not -- judges aren't free to indulge their own personal opinions about what good policy is. judges don't set policy. and to search for support for that in foreign law. despite judge sotomayor's claim at a duke law school panel discussion that -- quote -- -- f appeals is where policies is made. judges are not policy-makers. they are servants of the

supreme court nominee sonia sotomayor was one of the judges who decided the case. some of the argument from richard roberts, attorney for the city of new haven. >> if this court to reverse the judgment, you are saying the municipalities -- [inaudible] certify the exams and did not look into alternatives. >> i do not -- what they're saying is you should read mediate but not permit race to be the driving force on either end of their choice. it should be based on some objective standard. you have to look at the test and determine whether the test was there or not and if you say it is unfair, point to specifics of ways it was not. make sure that there are alternatives, that there is a fair test. >> you're not going to know if the test -- all you can get is an opinion that another test in fact may have a setback but this is that -- this is what title vii and kyrgyz. it must step back and try -- let's look into the alternatives. what we will do if you uphold summary judgment and you have that opportunity. that is what title vii requires. but the intent is not to discrimi

we need to get the truth about judge sonia sotomayor.e need to look at her record and determine what we are looking for in the united states supreme court. shinnies to get the same treatment the other nominees have been given. this is a classic american story about what is possible with hard work. she grew up in challenging circumstances. she worked hard for every single thing she got. many of you know her story. her dad died when she was 9 years old. her mom supporting her and her brother. her mother was so devoted to her education that she save every penny she could said that she could buy encyclopedia britannica for her children. this meant a lot to me, because i remember growing up seeing that that was an important set to have. demint a lot to our family. . sonia sotomayor graduated from princeton with high marks. . she went on to yale law school. when commentators have questioned whether she was smart enough, you cannot make up that you have these high awards from these prestigious universities. since graduating, the judge -- gradua

we thought we'd share a few thoughts about the sotomayor nomination. i think judge sotomayor deserves fair treatment. and we're going to ensure that that happens. the nomination to the supreme court always raises quite a number of important questions, and some of those questions have been discussed in recent days. i think it's quite appropriate that senators who have concerns, who want to or who are concerned about matters that they come to the floor and raise those before the hearing even. it gives the nominee a chance to be ready for the expressed concerns of senators. and also i think advance as national discussion on issues of great importance. today we talked about the second amendment, the -- i would just say a lot of people think the he willa case was a defining, decisive decision that i guarantee the individual right to keep and bear arms, and it was. however, it explicitly applied only to the federal law, and federal government of the district of columbia. and so in a footnote they note that had they were not deciding on the second, incorporat

it is also the kind of judge sonia sotomayor has been. i think that when she is elevated to the nation's highest court she will live up to justice thurgood marshall's description of the work of a judge. he said in our day-to-day work we must continue to realize we are dealing with individuals, not statistics. i think those are important words because we could have a fundamental impact on people's lives. let me tell you about one case. the lilly ledbetter case, five cusk -- five justices struck a blow to the rights of working families across the country is. 40 years ago congress put in place a law to outlaw discrimination in the workplace. men and women will receive equal pay for equal work. what they did, an activist court, a court made up of people who talked about judicial modesty and judicial restraint during the confirmation hearings, it is a court that struck down equal pay for women. i was very proud to be standing with lee ledbetter sitting right behind president obama when he signed the billy ledbetter law as his first act. -- we

now republican senators on supreme court nominee judge sonia sotomayor. members of the senate judiciary committee which is scheduled to begin confirmation hearings on july 13th. from the u.s. capitol this is 20 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, it is good to be with you in. we thought we would share of a few thoughts about the sonia sotomayor nomination. that i think that judge sotomayor deserves fair treatment and we are going to ensure that that happens. the nomination to the supreme court always raises quite a number of it in force questions and some of those questions have been discussed in recent days. i think it is quite appropriate the senate is two have concerns, who are concerned at about matters that they come to the floor and raise those before the hearing even. garrison nominee a chance to be ready for the expressed concerns of senators and also in france as a national discussion of issues of great importance. today we talked about the second amendment. i would just say that a lot of people thin

he was judge sotomayor's boss after she graduated. borrow morganthal, the only time i can remember him doing something like this. hero an op-ed piece supporting her. in the new york types. -- new york times. the submission to develop a more equitable society by creating opportunities for latinos in areas where they are traditionally underrepresented. their financial support comes from widely regarded foundations like ford and carnegie and corporate contributions from mainstream businesses like time warner. these are not radical foundations or corporations. some of the people that have been there, other past directors. judge jose cabriana, united states is court of appeals for the second circuit. former congressman, now a senior fellow at the manhattan institute. former governor of new york, hugh kerry. we all know about this part of her life because she very proudly disclosed her board membership and stats as an officer and response to the judiciary committee questionnaire that senator sessions and i sent her. we know about it because

i wish judge sotomayor had been similarly restrained on these issues. these were among the most important issues and questions that her record raises in which which must be addressed at the hearing. and so this is a fair way of letting her know in advance that this is an important issue to -- i think the majority of senators in the united states senate and certainly a majority of the people in this country and we'll expect her to tell us what her real feelings are on this and really what she believes the law really should say. and we'll give her every opportunity to represent herself and, of course, to bring us up to speed on what her personal feelings are and what her belief on the law really is in this particular area. >> jim? >> thank you. >> the questions here about the second amendment really bring up the question of whether the constitution still applies to all americans. president obama before he was president suggested in interviews that he saw the constitution as incomplete. as a charter of negative liberties. that it told the government what i

her and the district -- sotomayor and the other courts. they were intending to avoid being susceptible to a lawsuit. she said that instead what the city needs to do is focus on the evidence about whether it could be sued successfully. she said that the city's actions were justified. >> of this was watched because of the role of sotomayor in deciding cases at the second circuit level. what does this mean for her nomination? >> you will hear a lot of discussions about the issues i just discussed. whether this was a 5-4 decision where sotomayor was with the wing of the court that we would expect her to be on or whether this was 9-0 against her reasoning. that is a line that conservatives are starting to use. that all nine justices disagreed with her analysis. republicans against her are saying that that might give her a little bit more latitude to question her about the case. if the court were still considering it, she declined to comment on it. she may have commented on it nonetheless. conservatives say that gives them more of a basis to pre

the judge through out the ruling judge sotomayor gave. a look at that case later. >> on "washington journal" we talk to john nagl about u.s. withdrawal of troops from iraq. after that reggie walton on the prison rape commission, then the president for international policy talks about the situation in honduras and columbian president's visit to the u.s. later in the program dahliaa lithwick. later in the day a look at iran's presidential election and what's ahead at tehran. live coverage from the woodrow wilson center at 12:30 p.m. eastern. secretary of state hillary clinton addressed the situations in honduras, iran, and iraq at the state department briefing. she spoke for about 15 minutes. >> hello, how are you all? i actually missed you. and i want to thank you for the flowers. they are immeasurably adding to the healing process. i wanted to come down because there's a lot going on, and there are a number of important issues to address today. but i want to start with yesterday's unfortunate events in honduras. they were a test of the in

for more information on judge sotomayor, go to our website c-span.org. you will see more of her visits to capitol hill, reaction to the nomination, an even a look at the official senate questionnaire that she's required to fill out. that's at c-span.org. >> iran's interior ministry is claiming that mahmoud ahmadinejad is heading for a land lied victory but his main challenger says he is the winner and accusing the government of voter fraud. on "washington journal" we talked to a journalist in tehran about the situation. "the counterpoint to a landslide victory, his opponent is saying it amounts to treason and a statement from his opponent urges supporters to resist a governance of lies and detick tatership. -- dictatorship. the ministry said ahmadinejad had 63.3% of the vote and suvari had 44%, and based on ministry figures, around 75% of the country's 46.2 million eligible voters went to the polls. we are going to get more input from anna klinefield who works for the financial times and is their middle east correspondent. usually the votes take a long t

voted to confirm him here, almost the same number of days we're talking about with respect to the sotomayor nomination. the timetable on justice alito, almost the same, from the day he was nominated by president bush until the date that we voted here in the senate -- or at least the majority of our colleagues did -- almost the name number of days. i realize some of our colleagues are unhappy that we're providing the same kind of timetable for judge sotomayor that we provided for justice alito and chief justice roberts. i for the life of me -- i don't see what the beef is. just as i feel that we're fortunate to have someone with dr. grove's credentials to serve as our census bureau, i think we're lucky to have someone with judge sotomayor's credentials to serve on the supreme court. i had the opportunity to meet with her. i know a number of my colleagues have, too. and i must say, among the things i most like and respect about her, she grew up from nothing. she was a kid broken in the bronx, raised in -- she was a kid born in the bronx, raised in the bronx, a very humble beginning. and she w

he's appeared before jouge sotomayor in the second circuit court. i'm interested in what he has to say, i hope you all are as well. let's give him a warm welcome to the dallas chapter, tom dupri. [applause] >> good afternoon. thank you very much for inviting me here today and thank you, dan, for the kind introduction. it's always a pleasure for me to return to texas. as he mentioned, i clerked a little bit down the road in houston. it's wonderful to come back and have a chance to catch up with old friends and escape the summertime heat in washington, d.c. thank you very much for having me here today. what i thought i'd do is talk a little bit about president obama's -- the way he selected judge sotomayor to fill the souter vacancy and then talk about

destafano case, a case in which judge sotomayor participated on the panel before her court of appeals. that case, as you may recall, involves firefighters who took a competitive race-neutral examination for promotion to lieutenant or captain at the new haven fire department. the bottom line is that the supreme court could decide the ricky case in a matter of days, and the court's decision, i believe, will tell us a great deal about whether judge sotomayor's philosophy in that regard as far as the equal protection clause is concerned, is within the judicial mainstream or well outside of it. the ricky case is one way the american people could get a window into judge sotomayor's judicial philosophy. another way is to look at some of her public comments, including speeches made on the duty and responsibility of judging. the remarks that have drawn the most attention are those in which she said -- and i quote -- "i would hope that a wise latino woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." as

the cases been watched closely because supreme court nominee sotomayor was one of the judges who decided that case. joining us is a supreme court reporter for bloomberg news. thanks for joining us. before we get into the details of the supreme court's ruling, can you step back for just a moment out one with this case was all about. >> the city of new haven had a test for firefighter promotions to the captain and lieutenant. it turned out that no blacks qualified for more than a dozen promotions, and the city decided what it would do is just cancel the test and cancel the promotions, and when he did so, a group of mostly white, including one hispanic firefighter, sued. >> at what level was the suit reversed? >> the appeals court said that they could not sue. that the city basically acted in good faith because it was concerned it was going to be sued by black firefighters because the test on the surface at least had what is known as a disparate impact. it allowed -- it favored white firefighters, at least in terms of the bottom line. the supreme court today reversed that ruling and said th

nomination did any speech the senator said he is afraid judge suleyman york -- judge sonia sotomayor wants to be a player more than an umpire. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we welcome former congressman, governor, and secured a secretary, tom ridge. the department of homeless security formed in march of 2003. has the the problem of that to your expectations? guest: yes. i think one of the problems is when the aggregate 180,000 people, different agencies, and still try to build a system that works a more collaborative and effective fashion. but, yes, i think it has appeared a lot of people work very hard to form a fundamental policy decisions to assist not only president bush but on which