Senators Prep for '10 with Sotomayor in Mind
By Amy Harder
National Journal
The full political implications of President Obama's selection of Sonia Sotomayor won't be clear for some time. But if history is any indication, senators' questioning and votes in the forthcoming confirmation hearings could play a role in their re-election bids.
Legal experts hearken back to Senate elections where the incumbent's vote on a Supreme Court nominee became a hot-button issue. Christopher Eisgruber, provost of Princeton University and former clerk to Justice John Paul Stevens, recalled the failed re-election bid of former Sen. Alan Dixon, D-Ill., who many believe lost his 1992 primary race to challenger Carol Moseley Braun because he voted to confirm Clarence Thomas.
"That was a very special case," Eisgruber said. "Dixon lost his seat because it was connected to sexual harassment, rather than issues about the court. If the [Anita] Hill allegations had not come out, I don't think that confirmation proceeding would have the same kind of impact in the Senate." He added that he doesn't think Sotomayor's nomination will become a "wedge issue."
While most agreed that Sotomayor wouldn't be as controversial as Thomas, critics say that her stance on social issues and gun rights could trigger concern among red state Democrats or electoral fodder for those senators' challengers. "I think every senator understands that a vote on a Supreme Court nominee and judicial issues has the potential to be a salient electoral issue," said Gary Marx, executive director of the Judicial Confirmation Network. Already, lawmakers have begun shaping their responses to Sotomayor with future elections in mind.
