Senators to meet Obama’s nominee

Senators this week will begin to take the measure of Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The confirmation hearing for the court’s first Hispanic nominee is not expected until July. But on Tuesday, escorted by home state Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), she will meet key players, including Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and ranking member Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.).

More to come?

Sotomayor’s is the first Supreme Court nomination by a Democratic president since Steven Breyer’s in 1994. In the 15 years since Breyer’s confirmation, only two other justices have joined the court: John Roberts in 2005 and Samuel J. Alito in 2006. Despite those additions, the justices on the court that included Souter had served an average of 16 years apiece.

More changes could be coming. Justice John Paul Stevens is 89, and has been on the court for 33 years, one of the longest tenures in the court’s 220 years. Also, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and was rumored even before her illness to be considering retirement.

Change unlikely

Though Obama may replace more justices during his presidency, his appointments probably will not alter the ideological balance of the court, at least in the short term. The oldest justice, Stevens, was appointed by Republican President Gerald Ford, but has generally voted with the court’s liberal bloc, of which Ginsburg is a member. And the average age of the court’s conservatives is under 65. Even the oldest, Antonin Scalia —- a 73-year-old whom the word “vigorous” is often used to describe —- could likely outlast a two-term Obama presidency. But there is no guarantee that anyone confirmed to the court, a lifetime position, will hew to his or her presumed positions. Souter, appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, is a case in point. Assumed to be a moderate conservative, he has consistently voted with the court’s liberals.

Why confirmation is likely

> Sotomayor has served as a federal judge for 17 years. She was tapped to be a district court judge by President George H.W. Bush and was promoted to the federal appeals bench by President Bill Clinton.

> She has a classic Horatio Alger biography. The child of working-class Puerto Rican parents, she was raised in a New York housing project by her mother after her father’s death when she was 9. A singularly driven student, she was valedictorian at her high school and went on to attend Princeton University. After receiving her law degree at Yale, she was a New York prosecutor before being chosen as a judge.

> Her judicial record is made up largely of narrow rulings, with few examples of the sort of activism that conservatives decry.

> By the time of her confirmation vote, the Democrats, with the two independents who vote with them, may have a filibuster-proof majority of 60 votes. The Minnesota Supreme Court is expected to rule at any time on whether Democrat Al Franken should fill the Senate seat left vacant in the ongoing legal battle between him and Republican Norm Coleman over last fall’s narrow election. Franken led in the final recount. In any case, Sessions, the leading Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has ruled out a GOP filibuster attempt.

> Republican leaders are concerned that too vigorous a fight against Sotomayor’s confirmation could alienate Hispanics —- a growing voting bloc the GOP believes it can win over in future elections. Opposing Sotomayor would be “bad symbolism for the Republicans,” Republican strategist Matthew Dowd told the New York Times.

Why there will be a fight

> Sotomayor has not always ruled from the left, but Republicans say she has made it no secret that courts should take a role in social issues, especially when it comes to questions concerning minority rights. In particular, they point to her statement that “I would hope that a wise Latina 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.” Sotomayor defenders, including Obama, say the comment, part of a 4,000-word speech delivered in 2001, has been taken out of context. But conservatives —- most notably former House Speaker Newt Gingrich —- have condemned it as “racism.”

> Sotomayor’s position on abortion, perhaps the most sensitive issue the court is likely to face, is unclear. Despite assurances by Obama that she supports Roe v. Wade, senators on both sides will be seeking some indication of how she is likely to rule on any case that could overturn existing abortion laws.

> Sotomayor’s style is straightforward to the point of brusque, and some lawyers have complained about her over the years. Some opponents contend that her written opinions do not reflect the caliber of thought required of a Supreme Court justice. Defenders counter that her opinions tend to be narrow because they are precise.

> The nomination of a Supreme Court justice is one of the most visible tests of a president’s judgment. Any misstep would provide a prime opportunity for the Republicans to score points as they build their case against Obama and the Democrats in preparation for the 2010 midterm elections.

> Senate Democrats were tough in their questioning of both of President George W. Bush’s appointees, Roberts and Alito. Obama himself, a senator at the time, voted against their confirmation. Capitol Hill is not a place that forgives and forgets.

Sotomayor’s recordSotomayor’s record

Religion: Struck down as unconstitutional a White Plains, N.Y., law that prohibited the display of a menorah in a park. She said the City Council resolution barring religious displays in parks was a content-based regulation of speech that violated guarantees of religious expression.

In another case, she dissented from a decision in favor of a 70-year-old minister who sued his church for age discrimination after his forced retirement. She wrote that the government risked “an unconstitutional trespass” on religion if it mandated who religious groups can hire or fire as their spiritual leaders.

Press freedom: Ordered the government to make public the torn-up note found in the briefcase of a former Clinton White House counsel, Vincent Foster, who committed suicide. Her decision found in favor of the Wall Street Journal, which questioned the government account of Foster’s death and had sued for release of the note. She wrote that making it public, though painful for Foster’s family, would help settle a question of substantial public interest.

Labor: Ended a prolonged baseball strike by ruling against the team owners and in favor of the ballplayers, resulting in a quick resumption of play. In baseball cities, she was hailed as having saved the game.

Business: Wrote an opinion that would have allowed a man to sue a government contractor he accused of violating his constitutional rights. The man, while a resident of a contractor-run halfway house, had suffered a heart attack after being forced to climb a flight of stairs. The Supreme Court overturned the decision, ruling that only the individual agent who required the man to climb the stairs, not the corporation itself, could be sued.

Abortion: Relying on Supreme Court precedent, ruled against abortion-rights advocates who wanted to challenge what is known as the Mexico City rule. It forbade overseas organizations that receive U.S. funds from providing or promoting abortion services. “The Supreme Court has made clear that the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds,” Sotomayor wrote in an opinion that gave no broader hints of her views on abortion.

Privacy: In a dissent, said that strip searches of adolescent girls at a juvenile detention facility without suspicion of wrongdoing were unreasonable. She wrote that the searches were humiliating and could have a negative effect on the already troubled girls.

Environment: Wrote an opinion, overturned by the Supreme Court, interpreting an environmental law in a way that would favor more stringent protections, even if it cost power plant owners more money. Sotomayor rejected the contention that such regulations should be subject to a cost-benefits analysis, writing that “facilities must adopt the best technology available” to mitigate the effects of pollution.

Guns: Rejected a claim that a New York ban on a martial arts weapon violated a man’s Second Amendment rights, explaining the Second Amendment only applies to the federal government.

The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and the National Journal contributed to this article.