Lacking the votes to block Sonia Sotomayor from the US Supreme Court, Republicans established lines in the sand for challenging any future nominee for the high court and tried to limit President Barack Obama's options if he should get another opportunity to pick one. In four days of televised hearings, Republicans failed to knock Sotomayor off-balance or pin her with the label of a liberal who would make policy from the judicial bench. The hearings presented a high-profile opportunity for Republicans to trumpet the causes of their conservative base and respond to an administration seeking sweeping changes on health care, taxes, global warming and other big issues. They succeeded in getting Sotomayor to distance herself from Obama's wish for justices who have “empathy” and his belief that “what is in a judge's heart” should influence rulings. Under Republican questioning, she rejected the belief of some liberals that the Constitution is a “living” document whose meaning changes over time, and that foreign law should be used in deciding cases. Those responses established clear issues for Republicans to confront any future high-court nominee by Obama and could complicate his search for liberal candidates when the stakes may be higher if a conservative justice retires or dies. On the other hand, Sotomayor is widely expected to be confirmed by the Senate with a substantial number of Republican votes, suggesting that Obama has little to fear from Republicans. Senator Jeff Sessions, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Thursday that Republicans would not try to block a confirmation vote. He said he still had “serious concerns” about Sotomayor but was pleased she had repudiated Obama's “empathy” standard. Republicans used the opportunity to score points with their political base with a spirited, and mostly civil, volley of assaults, including repeated but futile attempts to pin her down on divisive issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, gun ownership and the death penalty. Not wanting to challenge her too aggressively for fear of alienating Hispanics, a growing voting block in the United States, they diverted much of their fire and cast the Obama administration as far to the left of mainstream Americans. It is a script sure to be used in next year's midterm elections and beyond. Republicans “got a chance to try out their lines,” said party consultant Rich Galen. “But it really doesn't mean much, because she's going to get confirmed.” Galen compared the hearings to a “Kabuki dance,” the highly stylized Japanese stage play where the outcome is known well beforehand. Sotomayor and her Democratic defenders challenged vigorously repeated Republican efforts to portray her as a liberal activist. Instead, she presented herself as a non-ideological, cautious and thorough jurist whose record reflected not judicial activism but a close adherence to law in her 17 years on the federal bench. She told the panel repeatedly that “Congress makes the laws,” not judges. And under persistent Republican questioning, she said she disagrees with Obama's contention that Supreme Court justices should have “empathy” and comments he made as a senator that sometimes judges must look into their hearts as a last resort. “We don't apply feelings to facts,” she said. And: “Judges can't rely on what's in their heart. ... The job of a judge is to apply the law.” That may have helped her chances for a larger confirmation margin. It also gave Republicans ammunition to use in the next Supreme Court nomination battle, raising the bar for any future Obama nominee. Sotomayor's hearing was not as contentious as it could have been, largely because she is replacing a retiring liberal and her confirmation will not affect the balance of the court. If the next vacancy is a member of the court's conservative bloc, however, the balance would be affected and the stakes far higher. Finding little in her written decisions to use against her, and given her earlier reputation as a tough prosecutor, Republicans focused on speeches she made. Senator John Cornyn told her: “You appear to be a different person almost” when speeches are compared with decisions. While Republicans did not want to antagonize Hispanics by being too harsh on the woman who would be the court's first Hispanic member, some analysts suggested that they had done so already. “By not coming out for her and asking critical questions of her, they are alienating a large base of the Hispanic community,” said American University political scientist James Thurber. Cornyn rejected that line of thought. “My constituents, Hispanic and others, expect me to do my job,” the Texas Republican said. But Hispanic women interviewed around the country this week by The Associated Press said they were troubled by the underlying themes of the questions from white, male senators at Sotomayor's hearings. Republicans on the panel repeatedly pressed her on her 2001 remark in a speech that a “wise Latina” judge would often make better decisions than a white male. Republicans challenged her impartiality and whether she would allow ethnic identification to trump the law. Sotomayor maintained again and again that the comment had been a rhetorical flourish gone awry. On Thursday, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham asked her yet again what she had to say to those offended by her “wise Latina” remarks. “I regret that I have offended some people. I believe that my life demonstrates that that was not my attempt to leave the impression that some have taken from my words.” Such comments made it hard for Republicans to gain much traction against her. Graham decided not to try further and cut her off. “You know what judge? I agree with you,” he said. “Good luck.”
