I was perusing a front page article in the Globe this morning (co-written by a brilliant young reporter who coincidentally shares my last name), and I noted that Republicans are taking offense at the idea that someone’s life story should be considered in determining his or her fitness for the bench:
Obama, however, was quickly challenged by critics who contended she was picked more for her personal story – and her gender and ethnicity – than her legal credentials.
Now, hypocrisy is a bi-partisan disease in Washington, and memories are notoriously short, but let us hearken back to the confirmation of a man who was one of the objectively least qualified nominees to the Supreme Court bench ever. In what was surely one of the most cynical nominations ever, the first Bush nominated a right wing opportunist to replace Thurgood Marshall, a true civil rights hero.
As always, the hearings revolved around abortion. This was at about the time when the Democrats finally began to realize that abortion could be a winning issue for them; though they never really had the guts or brains to mount a full throated attack on the American Taliban. Thomas, of course, was clearly anti-abortion, and just as clearly wanted to avoid saying so. His strategy was to talk about his rags to riches rise (so far as I know, he never got around to explaining why he decided to kick the ladder to the ground after he made it to the top). For instance, when confronted with a quote in which he clearly endorsed an anti-abortion screed, he preferred to talk about his background:
In responding to Senator Biden’s question, Judge Thomas also made a point to mention his grandfather and mother several times. Part of the White House strategy in the hearings is for Judge Thomas to talk as much as possible about his rise from poverty.
Those of us who lived through those hearings remember that strategy well. Thomas cast himself as the victim of racism (by the way, he apparently feels he was the last such victim) whenever anyone questioned his views, and, whenever possible, he would talk about his personal story. Given the time and his color he effectively cowed the Senate Democrats, who were deathly afraid of being pictured as racists, much to the delight of the Republican racists that nominated Thomas and expected exactly that reaction from the Democrats. Thomas, of course, dwelt on his story prior to the time that affirmative action got him into Yale Law School, and prior to the time that he signed on with Ronald Reagan to try to destroy affirmative action for those still mired in the poverty he escaped. He also stopped the story prior to the time he sexually harassed Anita Hill, and when that came out his nomination was temporarily derailed, but she was easily smeared and the tawdry excuse for a judge got his confirmation, and has gone on to be exactly the right wing judge we all expected.
Thankfully, there’s more to Sotomayor than a good story, and she stacks up well beside Thomas.
Thomas was judged minimally qualified by the American Bar Association. Expect that Sotomayor will earn their highest accolade. She is being unsuccessfully criticized for saying that she can still empathize with the less fortunate; he has never been accused of that particular “failing”. Her life story is icing on the cake. His life story was all the cake there was.
