Judging the New Justice

" Are cash rent to to discuss. Judge Sonia Sotomayor is confirmation hearings here and not think so much for joining us first of all. Thank you thank."

" You may actually have what further apart we'll rent for her there is a lawyer and yet tell us what your experience was when you. When the important thing in my life."

" I was before her on several occasions when she was a district court judge on our cash and and I guess that the most substantial example. Represented. When the parties and rather -- publicized trade dress case between two beverage manufacturers and that was there was a hearing. In the hotly contested -- a hearing on on these issues. My experience with her and that and in other copyright case in which -- appeared before her. She is invariably. Extremely well prepared when -- come in for an argument. She is a very smart thoughtful judge she shows a great respect for precedent and knowledge of the important precedents and -- She can be. Very tough on on lawyers if she thinks that you're trying to put something over honor she's going to let you know it and it's not going to buy it if she -- like the way of handling a case she's going to let you know it. I'm on the appellate panel it's a little bit of a different experience -- the -- in the second circuit she would usually serve as one of three right three judges on the panel. And you were less of the master of your own courtroom you have to -- first -- you're not hearing evidence you're just hearing arguments which tend to be -- very brief presentation. And you're you're mindful of the other judges on the panel I've watched it there too and again she always. Was very very well prepared. Do you talk about president is a lot of talk out there are some criticism than than some not so much so about what not she would adhere more to precedents or in the Supreme Court. Whether she would you know rule with empathy years as some are saying. And you know maybe I try and if you will legislate from the bench. Where do you see her coming down. In terms of that is that something easy to forecast I don't think it is easy to forecast I'm looking a lot of the studies that you tried to you know sur -- all of her decisions. For instance in the business world she has not been predictably. Pro business or anti business that was in late 2006 there was a big securities class action came up for review. To the second circuit and which she was part of a panel that said that the district court's approach. Abusing six focus cases in this case that said that a number of a large investment banks. Had manipulated the the value of some tech companies that initial public offerings. What disabuse us of an acceptable approach the second circuit panel she was on so now that six focus case approach would not be acceptable. And frankly the effect of that was to leave a lot of small investors with no practical way. Of pursuing their rights now. The panel thought that that was the correct legal approach even though it had a harsh result for individuals. So I don't think that she ends up TWA it was also viscerally -- Barack. Correctly ruled that it was -- she was saying that it was in international waters on the panel did come -- its US waters of the damage of TBA flight 800 of them are trying to sue for damages and another example might be I think she was on the Maurice claret versus an appellate panel. Which -- there was a challenge to the NFL's mandatory for your way out of high school before he could be in the NFL draft. A pro individual judge might have said now. I'm not going uphold this mandatory for your weight and she was part of pound did --"

" In fact one of our viewers from San Francisco is saying that she may not be tough as people think but you're saying your experience whether that. She's pretty cabinet and other viewers saying that as long Michigan -- from the law and -- we leave out personal feelings and probably yes she'd be a great candidate. Otherwise -- as they do feel pretty strongly at least -- viewers that."

" It's important to keep in mind is the difference between. Showing bias because of your experiences and being mindful of your experiences in deciding how decisions wolf -- That. The landscape. There's no evidence to me that she's going to -- advised by the way in the famous firefighter case guess one of the point this was Hispanic. Okay. And she's she seems to put me to be pretty Fairmont and didn't and her approach he has the respect for the law. -- that hateful play a big role in the coverage from here I really don't think it well the reversal. First hole was a pretty narrow change it was a 54 vote. Her decision -- which which latest an anonymous for -- decision by a three judge panel on the second circuit. Was made in light of the then existing on the second circuit. It had to do with the notion that a disparate impact. And this kind of test for instance wouldn't be acceptable what the Supreme Court really did was to say. We're going to raise the evidentiary burden if you're going to go with the disparate impact defense. And it was really the Supreme Court trauma the second circuit -- to make that decision."

" Yeah and that no dusk and AME now I understand when the firefighters may be testifying. On the hill -- the lead plaintiff. -- I have to ask going to testify and I'm sure he's got an axe to grind I'm sure that will be interest and we have we heard some analysis on the network this morning some people -- saying if they were they would not put him there and we should be uninteresting and is is that president for something like this there there --"

" There's precedent for -- anybody you want frankly. It has been a a a pretty wide open down. Rodeos and since the Bork hearings many years ago or Clarence Thomas hearings anything is really acceptable depending upon. What side of of the -- you're coming from. But what I think the ultimate question really should be whether it's it's. Looking at the general judicial landscape looking at the business judicial landscape the question is you need to look. At in individual nominee not just in terms of that nominee's past. But what effect if any can that nominee's going onto the court the expected to have in terms of the ideological makeup of the court. Given that she would be replacing Justice Souter who was proven most of the time to be a member of the court's more liberal wing even if everyone were correct and she could be expected to be a more reliably liberal member of the court that would mean to be no ideological change in the makeup of the court. It would be like replacing. Chief Justice. Rehnquist with chief Justice Roberts one conservative for simply a younger conservative it would not be for instance like replacing Sandra Day O'Connor. Who was a right leaning centrist. With justice Leo was more predictably conservative. -- and certainly not like replacing for instance Thurgood Marshall was the far left the court Clarence Thomas that was in the far right."

" The challenges for a lot of these candidates is to sort of give their opinion but not. Tread too far into how they would rule in future cases especially when they're asked questions regarding abortion or gun rights does have to think so is that typical balance. For someone going before -- process in these hearings and then what what should people be listening for when they watch that."

" It it is a difficult balance. You can be sure that many of the senators especially those are going to try and make her uncomfortable. Are going to try and probed very deeply in terms of where she will go I expect she will. Follow the line it's been established in all the post war hearings in fact I think even more declined to say how he would rule on certain issues. I don't think she will say how she will rule I think -- give very broad based questions. And she will not give any hint of how she -- specific case and I think to be it in improper for her to to do so. The wise Latina comment we keep hearing that coming governor wasn't just sort of you know comment playing to her audience is that you know some people say it's it's off putting. The way it comes across. How much would that come into play from critics or perhaps from those sympathetic to her I already heard from one of the Republican senators this morning and you can be sure you're going to hear coming up again. I think it passed she's probably going to say it may not have been the best choice of words what she was simply trying to say I think. Is that people are necessarily affected by their experience and that -- experience gives them an understanding of how the Supreme Court decisions. And or any appellate court decisions are going to affect those people who who reliant law. I I don't think that some I I think she's probably going to move off that a little bit. But frankly it's not much different from Clarence Thomas saying it's important. To to have an appreciation for. Issues that they you've walked in when you make decisions and he was as reliable conservative as you could have is very quickly here does she get approved and is there a big business case -- on the horizon that we should be looking toward. I'm not. Well the Supreme Court is right now deciding since its discretionary view which certain petitions will be granted for next year so -- I'm not aware right now any big business case that that we should assume will be coming up for argument next year. And so it was -- or is does she get approved I think she's going to be readily approved it's not only as of the sixty. Reliable votes I think a number of Republicans -- vote for my guess is going to be should get between seventy and 75 votes. All right. Tom her fervor from Pryor -- thanks so much for joining us here at the front so we'll see how that unfolds again its size showing on the Fox News Channel right now if you want to check it out and now we're going to have an update from the NYC coming up."