The Corner

Sotomayor & the PRLDEF

In a hearing, the legal concept of “relevance” is a dynamic one. If you are going to take the position that some factual area is irrelevant, you must proceed as if it really is of no significance. The White House and Democrats have taken the position that Judge Sotomayor’s tenure with the leftist Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund is irrelevant to her fitness to serve on the Supreme Court. But that’s not how Senate Democrats are acting.

Plainly, Sotomayor’s PRLDEF tenure is extremely relevant. It consumed 12 years of her professional life.  She has described her role there as “Member and Vice President, Board of Directors Chairperson, Litigation and Education Committees.” As Jen Rubin recounted at Contentions, the New York Times detailed that “Ms. Sotomayor was an involved and ardent supporter of their various legal efforts during her time with the group” — legal efforts that included “aggressive stances on issues like police brutality, the death penalty and voting rights” (as well as abortion — and work with ACORN).

That would be highly relevant even if Democrats had not, during the Alito confirmation hearings, taken the position that documents from the “Concerned Alumni of Princeton” were crucial, and even if Democrats hadn’t derailed Miguel Estrada’s nomination, in part, by complaining about the refusal of the Bush administration to produce some memoranda from Estrada’s time at the Justice Department.

Yet, though the PRLDEF has hundreds of boxes of materials from Sotomayor’s time there, Sen. Jeff Sessions argued a few days ago that very little of it has been produced. As CQ reported:

PRLDEF has reviewed only three of more than 300 boxes of materials, and from that we have received only 300 pages of documents. This is unacceptable,” Sessions said. “Rather than simply defend PRLDEF, the White House should respect the Judiciary Committee’s important bipartisan request that these documents be delivered to the committee in a timely manner so they can be reviewed before Judge Sotomayor’s hearing.

In the course of the hearing so far, Sotomayor has postured as if she and the PRLDEF had nothing to do with each other — that she didn’t review briefs or get involved in the group’s legal stances. And now, as Ed just pointed out at Bench Memos, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse has attempted to rehabilitate her on this dubious testimony, taking pains to minimize Sotomayor’s role.

Democrats shouldn’t be allowed to have it both ways. If the PRLDEF is relevant enough for Democrats to elicit testimony about, then it’s relevant enough for Republicans to press hard to get the pertinent documents and time to review them. In a legal trial — which is far less important than vetting a nominee for a lifetime appointment on the nation’s highest court — a judge in such a situation would routinely order the disclosure of the relevant documents and grant an adjournment so they could be reviewed; otherwise, disclosure is not meaningful or consistent with due process. Why should less than that be acceptable here?

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Yes, They Are Coming for Your Guns

At the Democratic-primary debate in Houston last night, Beto O’Rourke formally killed off one of the gun-control movement’s favorite taunts: The famous “Nobody is coming for your guns, wingnut.” Asked bluntly whether he was proposing confiscation, O’Rourke abandoned the disingenuous euphemisms that have ... Read More
White House

Politico Doubles Down on Fake Turnberry Scandal

It's tough to be an investigative reporter. Everybody who feeds you a tip has an axe to grind. Or, alternatively, you find yourself going, "I wonder if . . . ?" You put in your research, you talk to lots of people, you accumulate a huge pile of information, but you still haven't proved your hypothesis. A wise ... Read More

Four Cheers for Incandescent Light Bulbs

It brought me much -- indeed, too much -- joy to hear of the Trump administration's rollback of restrictions on incandescent light bulbs, even if the ban will remain in place. The LED bulbs are terrible. They give off a pitiable, dim, and altogether underwhelming "glow," one that never matched the raw (if ... Read More
White House

Rachel Maddow’s Turnberry Tale

To a certain kind of Rachel Maddow viewer, there are few more titillating preludes to a news segment than the one she delivered Monday: “If you have not seen it yet, you are going to want to sit down.” Maddow’s story began, as many of her stories do, with President Trump, this time focused on his hotel ... Read More