The Senate Judiciary Committee is voting on the Sotomayor nomination this morning.   It’s a full committee vote which will then send the nomination out to the Senate as a whole for a floor vote.

Senators are giving a little colloquy on the reasons for their vote along with their actual vote.

I initially tried to watch this via the committee’s webcast, but I couldn’t get the sound to work, so I’m coming in mid-speech from Sen. Sessions.  I’ll try to summarize a bit as we go forward.

Sen. Leahy’s statement is posted already on the SJC website.  Votes yes.

Sen. Sessions statement can be summed up by reading his USAToday op-ed from earlier. And then reading some NRA fundraising literature. That pretty much covers it.  Votes no.

Sen. Kohl sure does like her.  And he’d like tougher hearings in the future.  Votes yes.

Sen. Hatch sure does think having an Hispanic nominee is nifty, but he can’t vote for her even though he sure does like her as a person.  Votes no.

Sen. Feinstein:  word of the day for DiFi is impressive.  Votes yes.

Sen. Grassley cannot support the nomination. Andrew Cohen’s commentary on Grassley gives some background on the utter inconsistency of this vote from him.

And this pretty much sums up what I’m thinking: this is all future nomination kabuki and positioning to throw up markers for future Obama nominations to the federal bench.  I’d say more, but Grassley’s monotone delivery is making me comatose.  And I think he may be repeating some of his speech.  Or maybe it just all sounds the same.  He’s voting no.

Sen. Feingold says that the process was scrupulously fair and that everyone had plenty of time for the questions they wanted to ask.  Commends Leahy and staff for making so much of this information available online for the public — standard for transparency and public access is excellent.  Goes through his reasons for voting on Sotomayor — refers to her answer on Korematsu.   Votes yes.

Sen. Kyl having statement placed in the record.  Sessions has his proxy — Kyl has GOP duties that require him to be elsewhere.  Proxy will be cast at time of vote.

Sen. Graham voting for Sotomayor.  Says he really enjoys politics, and has enjoyed representing SC, and enjoyed trying tohelp McCain get elected…but we lost.  With his vote, he’s trying to recognize that we came perilously close to trying to damage the courts  — but more times than not the courts have been ahead of where the public has gone, and feels that the filibusters drive good men and women away from wanting to become judges.  Says judges are a different standard from the political arena — don’t make the law an extension of politics in another form.  Says her speeches did bug the hell out of him — because she was a judge at the time she gave the speeches.  "But, you know what?  How many of my speeches would bug the hell out of the other side…probably all of them."  Says that we are over 200 years old as a nation, and this is the first Latino woman to be nominated for the SCOTUS — and that is a big deal.  Says she meets the qualification test applied to Scalia and Ginsburg, and she’s an inspiration.  Votes yes.

Sen. Schumer starts thanks to Leahy and Sessions, and a kudo to Graham.  This is an historic day for America…blah blah blah.  Essentially his "great American story" speech from her introduction to the committee.   Says her lengthy record on the bench shows that she comes to her cases without arrogance and without an agenda — she’s adheres to the rule of law, and judges each case individually.  If GOP colleagues cannot support a moderate pick like Sotomayor, then that suggests that they can’t vote for anyone who is not an extreme conservative.  Votes yes.

Sen. Cornyn starts with a gosh, thanks for this pleasant hearing. Cornyn now making the Federalist Society argument against Sotomayor — with a little NRA fundraising and and Ricci blahbity blah. Word of the day for him: radical. (CHS notes:  His staffer on the left must have helped write this speech, because he is sitting behind him looking awfully self-satisfied and smug. Ick.)  Wants us all to be good little Federalist Society footsoldiers.  Votes no. 

Sen. Durbin talking about the importance of a SCOTUS appointment vote.    Says we’ve had two women justices and two African-Americans — that’s why this is so significant.  What a great story for America, what she has achieved.  After pouring over more than 3,000 cases from 17 years of judicial experience and hundreds of pages of letters, speeches and other materials, the GOP focused their opposition primarily on one case and one speech.  Durbin says that standard is ridiculous — especially for Senators who get to revise and extend their remarks.  Then talks about importance of diversity for differing points of view and perspectives — but also so that Americans see governmental processes as fair.  Talks about the fact that the NRA, for the first time, is putting this SCOTUS vote on its scorecard.  Votes yes.

Sen. Coburn starts with a passive aggressive whine at Durbin.  And he’s wearing an incredibly green tie that is really bad on the teevee.   Continues with the whiny, aggreived tone and peevishly gripes about her speeches and foreign law, rambling around a bit complaining that Sotomayor wasn’t more of a Bork.  Good time for a fresh cuppa coffee.   Voting no.

Sen. Cardin says he’ll support Sotomayor.  Says that Sotomayor folows precedent to advance individual rights.  Believes Sotomayor is not only well qualified, but that her record shows her to be thoughtful and adhering to the constitution and the rule of law.  Voting yes.

Sen. Whitehouse says he’ll be voting for her as well.  Her 17-year-record is noncontroversial and shows that she’s dedicated to the rule of law and gives people before her a fair hearing.  That she will decide cases based on the law and the facts before her.   Whitehouse says that this is an attempt to define justice in America by a particular point of view — says that it cannot be defined as a norm by which all other points of view are defined as an abberation.  Paraphrasing recent article characterizing current segment of SCOTUS as for corporations and against individuals. 

Sen. Klobuchar starts with the encyclopedia story again.  And then moves on to discussing the prosecutorial work that Sotomayor did right out of law school.  Quotes the old Moynihan bit:  you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts — and says that Sotomayor’s record belies attempts to cast her as a radical out of the mainstream.  Hits back at the "temperament" BS.  Voting yes.

Sen. Kaufman concentrates on her business and regulatory experience as being helpful for SCOTUS especialy at this time.   Enters floor statement from the Senate into the record.  Will vote yes.

Sen. Specter says he will vote to confirm Sotomayor, comes with an extraodinary record.   Goes on a ramble about women standing up for women, and how much better the Senate is with more women in it.  Goes on a ramble about Plessy and other shifting values cases.  Dabs at his eyes due to some chemo side effects — and says he’s fit as a fiddle and ready for the election.  Then some blah-bity-blah about Bork’s original intent absolutism and why he was rejected. 

Sen. Franken says this nomination comes at a critical moment for SCOTUS at a time when the current court has struck down long-standing precedents for individual liberties and protections.  Will be voting for Sotomayor.

Roll call vote upcoming.  Vote total is 13 to 6.

Kohl — Aye

Feinstein — Aye

Feingold — Aye

Schumer — Aye

Durbin — Aye

Whitehouse — Aye

Klobuchar — Aye

Kaufman — Aye

Specter — Aye

Franken — Aye

Sessions — No

Hatch — No

Grassley — No

Kyl — No, by proxy vote from Sessions  (C-Span showing empty chair)

Graham — Aye

Cornyn — No, by proxy vote from Sessions  (C-Span showing empty chair)

Coburn — No, by proxy vote from Sessions  (C-Span showing empty chair)

Leahy — Aye