WASHINGTON — Floor debate over Sonia Sotomayor's history-making nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court began late Tuesday -- and though her confirmation seems assured, it will not happen painlessly.
Senate Republicans are determined to use the occasion to mount a broad attack on what they view as a liberal legal agenda favored by Sotomayor and the Obama administration.
Almost 30 lawmakers are expected to take the floor in coming days to criticize the nominee and perhaps lay down a marker in advance of the next Supreme Court vacancy.
Even so, there appears to be little doubt about the outcome this time around.
None of the majority Democrats has come out against the New York federal appeals judge, and at least six Republicans plan to cross party lines and support her. A final floor vote is expected Thursday or Friday, and a simple majority of senators is needed for confirmation.
Though the GOP long ago abandoned any idea of filibustering, draining much of the drama out of the final vote, Republicans have mounted a more vociferous campaign against Sotomayor than many observers expected.
The floor debate will serve as an extension of that, Republican aides said, giving the party an opportunity to voice its concerns over gun rights, racial preferences, property rights and other issues that arose during the confirmation hearings.
Some senators also maintain that President Obama and Sotomayor are practitioners of "identity politics," seeking to use the law to favor minority groups at the expense of other Americans.
"I have expressed the view since this process began that we are at a fork in the road," Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said during his opening remarks Tuesday.
"Will we continue to adhere to the classical idea of American jurisprudence? Or will we follow results-oriented judging in which judges cease to be committed to equal justice?" he said.
Sessions suggested that Sotomayor had misrepresented herself during her three days of testimony.
He also said he did not believe she could be impartial, pointing to a much-criticized 2001 speech she delivered at UC Berkeley in which she said that she hoped a "wise Latina" judge would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male would.
"I came to this process with an open mind regarding Judge Sotomayor," Sessions said. "But certain aspects of her record troubled me . . . whether she is deeply committed to the ideal of objectivity and impartiality."
