General Categories > Laws and Legislation

Ben Nelson's Response

(1/9) > >>

Ram Ringer:
Here is Bennie's response to me about Sotomayor.  I plan to hang onto this and remind him of what he said when she turns out to be another activist. I can't believe he can be duped this easy.



Dear Galen:

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to serve as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.  I am pleased you contacted me on this issue, as I value your input.

 

As you may know, Justice Sotomayor was confirmed by the United States Senate by a vote of 68?31 on August 6, 2009; I voted in favor of her confirmation.  I - like you and other Americans of all political and judicial philosophies - recognized the importance of Justice Sotomayor's nomination.  As with all nominations of this magnitude, I looked carefully at her judicial record, conducted a face-to-face meeting, and fully considered her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee to find answers to the questions raised by Nebraskans regarding her competency.  As a result, I determined that Justice Sotomayor is an experienced, well-educated judge who will show respect for the laws and Constitution of the United States and deference to settled law and precedent.

 

In particular, I was heartened by the views that independent experts on the federal judiciary had to say regarding her background.  For example, the American Bar Association gave Justice Sotomayor a unanimous rating of "well qualified," stating that "Judge Sotomayor's opinions show an adherence to precedent and an absence of attempts to set policy based on the judge's personal views.  Her opinions are narrow in scope, address only the issues presented, do not revisit settled areas of law, and are devoid of broad or sweeping pronouncements."

 

In addition, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service analyzed her record as a judge and concluded:  "Perhaps the most consistent characteristic of Judge Sotomayor's approach as an appellate judge has been an adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis (i.e., the upholding of past judicial precedents).  Other characteristics appear to include what many would describe as a careful application of particular facts at issue in a case and a dislike for situations in which the court might be seen as overstepping its judicial role."  This is high praise indeed, especially for those of us like me who eschew judicial activism and value a limited role for judges.

 

I understand that some Nebraskans still have concerns regarding various aspects of Justice Sotomayor's career.  For instance, throughout the confirmation process, certain comments Justice Sotomayor made outside the courtroom were the subject of much criticism.  Indeed, some of these remarks could have been cause for concern if they proved to slant the judge's approach to the law or impede her ability to render an unbiased opinion.  But after examining her record, meeting personally with her, and observing the Judiciary Committee hearings, I am convinced Justice Sotomayor will approach the Supreme Court with the same unbiased fidelity to the law that has marked her distinguished career thus far.  Simply put, I see no significant evidence that she has manipulated the facts of a case or interpretations of the law in the courtroom to alter the outcome of a case.

 

In addition, some have singled out a handful of decisions Justice Sotomayor has participated in as grounds for disqualification.  I do not expect a judge to agree with me all of the time, just as I do not agree with all the laws or precedents on the books; however, I firmly believe that disagreeing with a law or a precedent is not grounds for a judge to rewrite the law as he or she sees fit.  And while I may not personally agree with the outcome of every single case Justice Sotomayor has decided, it is clear to me that her opinions were informed by facts, bound by precedents, and adhered faithfully to the law.

 

As a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Justice Sotomayor decided more than 3,000 cases.  Only thirteen of these cases were reviewed by the Supreme Court, and only five of those were reversed.  Of the opinions she authored, five were reviewed; her opinion was upheld in two, and she was reversed or vacated in three.  This compares favorably with recent Supreme Court reversal rates and recent Supreme Court nominees.

 

My approach to confirmation of judicial nominees has not changed during my time in Congress.  I have voted to confirm the overwhelming majority of nominees to come before the Senate - including both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court - and my standards for what I consider a qualified judge have not changed since my days in the Governor's Office, when I appointed 81 judges, including the entire Nebraska Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.

 

As with every judicial nomination that I consider, I vote with the conviction that the nominee will adjudicate based on the record the nominee developed throughout his or her career.  In the years ahead, I trust Justice Sotomayor will make an important contribution to the Supreme Court.  I wish her well in her new role.

 

Thank you again for contacting me to share your views on this nomination.  The legislative process will only work with the input of concerned citizens, and I encourage you to continue sharing your thoughts.


Sincerely,

Ben Nelson
U.S. Senator 

 

FarmerRick:
Yeah, I got the same lame excuse of a letter today as well.


Sen. Nelson, your time as a Nebraska Senator is about up. You WILL be voted out next election.



Now...who do we get to replace him?

Roper:
Looks like he spammed us all with the same response!  His vote should not be surprising.   Don't underestimate his ability to stay in office, the Cornhusker state showed some signs of "blueitis" last fall.  I don't think he is up for election for 3 years, guess we'll see who wants to step up and be a serious challenger.

huskergun:
Well look at that I got the same letter. Gee surprise me.
Goodbye Ben.
 We all better hope that blueitis doesn't spread any more.


Dear Rich:

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to serve as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.  I am pleased you contacted me on this issue, as I value your input.

 

As you may know, Justice Sotomayor was confirmed by the United States Senate by a vote of 68?31 on August 6, 2009; I voted in favor of her confirmation.  I - like you and other Americans of all political and judicial philosophies - recognized the importance of Justice Sotomayor's nomination.  As with all nominations of this magnitude, I looked carefully at her judicial record, conducted a face-to-face meeting, and fully considered her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee to find answers to the questions raised by Nebraskans regarding her competency.  As a result, I determined that Justice Sotomayor is an experienced, well-educated judge who will show respect for the laws and Constitution of the United States and deference to settled law and precedent.

 

In particular, I was heartened by the views that independent experts on the federal judiciary had to say regarding her background.  For example, the American Bar Association gave Justice Sotomayor a unanimous rating of "well qualified," stating that "Judge Sotomayor's opinions show an adherence to precedent and an absence of attempts to set policy based on the judge's personal views.  Her opinions are narrow in scope, address only the issues presented, do not revisit settled areas of law, and are devoid of broad or sweeping pronouncements."

 

In addition, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service analyzed her record as a judge and concluded:  "Perhaps the most consistent characteristic of Judge Sotomayor's approach as an appellate judge has been an adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis (i.e., the upholding of past judicial precedents).  Other characteristics appear to include what many would describe as a careful application of particular facts at issue in a case and a dislike for situations in which the court might be seen as overstepping its judicial role."  This is high praise indeed, especially for those of us like me who eschew judicial activism and value a limited role for judges.

 

I understand that some Nebraskans still have concerns regarding various aspects of Justice Sotomayor's career.  For instance, throughout the confirmation process, certain comments Justice Sotomayor made outside the courtroom were the subject of much criticism.  Indeed, some of these remarks could have been cause for concern if they proved to slant the judge's approach to the law or impede her ability to render an unbiased opinion.  But after examining her record, meeting personally with her, and observing the Judiciary Committee hearings, I am convinced Justice Sotomayor will approach the Supreme Court with the same unbiased fidelity to the law that has marked her distinguished career thus far.  Simply put, I see no significant evidence that she has manipulated the facts of a case or interpretations of the law in the courtroom to alter the outcome of a case.

 

In addition, some have singled out a handful of decisions Justice Sotomayor has participated in as grounds for disqualification.  I do not expect a judge to agree with me all of the time, just as I do not agree with all the laws or precedents on the books; however, I firmly believe that disagreeing with a law or a precedent is not grounds for a judge to rewrite the law as he or she sees fit.  And while I may not personally agree with the outcome of every single case Justice Sotomayor has decided, it is clear to me that her opinions were informed by facts, bound by precedents, and adhered faithfully to the law.

 

As a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Justice Sotomayor decided more than 3,000 cases.  Only thirteen of these cases were reviewed by the Supreme Court, and only five of those were reversed.  Of the opinions she authored, five were reviewed; her opinion was upheld in two, and she was reversed or vacated in three.  This compares favorably with recent Supreme Court reversal rates and recent Supreme Court nominees.

 

My approach to confirmation of judicial nominees has not changed during my time in Congress.  I have voted to confirm the overwhelming majority of nominees to come before the Senate - including both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court - and my standards for what I consider a qualified judge have not changed since my days in the Governor's Office, when I appointed 81 judges, including the entire Nebraska Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.

 

As with every judicial nomination that I consider, I vote with the conviction that the nominee will adjudicate based on the record the nominee developed throughout his or her career.  In the years ahead, I trust Justice Sotomayor will make an important contribution to the Supreme Court.  I wish her well in her new role.

 

Thank you again for contacting me to share your views on this nomination.  The legislative process will only work with the input of concerned citizens, and I encourage you to continue sharing your thoughts.


Sincerely,

Ben Nelson
U.S. Senator

AAllen:
With the O'mesiah's job rting falling so fast if we have a quality opponent to run against him 4 years may be all he gets, and a strong Republican showing could upset some fairly safe congress members as well.  Whomever runs against Ben will need to tie him to the Democrats and Obama and not let him tout his conservitive credentials, fiscally he is a conservative but taking the lead from his party could end his career.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page