Day 1: Judge Sonia Sotomayor Confirmation Hearings

Today was the first day of the confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

I got rather annoyed by all the sports metaphors used to clarify how qualified she is for the job, but I can't totally knock the American Constitution Society for trying to make Supreme Court hearings interesting to the masses.

Still, I have to agree with my friend Nisha Chittal who commented that the overdose of baseball allusions might be connected to the fact that 80% of the Senate is made up of men. From the SCOTUS Blog:

An (incomplete) review of the senators' written statements and oral testimony finds the phrase "balls and strikes" used 11 times, "umpire" or "umpires" used 16 times, and "playing field" used twice today. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Tex., perhaps appealing to his Big 12 base, went for a football simile instead.

I'd really like to see these Senators actually level the playing field when it comes to women vs. men on the high court before leveraging their knowledge of men's sports during the confirmation of SCOTUS' first Latina member. But then of course, bringing gender into the equation is a "no-no" according to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) who was slightly offended when Sotomayor suggested that "a wise Latina woman could make a better decision than a white man."

Who knew that Graham was so sensitive to gender? The NYT Caucus Blog expands on his sentiments during the hearings:

While Senator Graham obviously spouted some of the most amusing one-liners in his statement, we've been sitting here debating whether he would have said to a man: "unless you have a meltdown, you're gonna get confirmed." Just asking. Or would someone address a male judge by saying, "Unless you lose it, or blow a gasket?" Is meltdown gender-specific?

Even with this seemingly astute observation by the New York Times of the obvious gender stereotyping , the NYT writers tripped over their own gender neutrality when they went ahead and not only live-blogged the happenings of the hearing, but also the outfits of the female attendees in shockingly smug detail:

Still nursing a broken ankle, Ms. Sotomayor wore a cobalt blue pants suit, a color often worn by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It's as if the mainstream media almost knew what it was doing when it came to being feminist friendly, and then promptly forgot whilst caught in the "glare" of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's outfit:

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, clad in a satin brocade suit that practically casts a glare around her on television, reminds the panel that when Sandra Day O'Connor was selected, the first woman justice talked about how it had taken more than 100 years to reach that ceiling.

The partisan bickering is expected, but the bizarre gender laced judgments by the politicians and the mainstream media are always shocking to me. But hey - it's a woman with last name that requires you to roll your "r's" -  we all knew that Sotomayor was going to be a challenge to the patriarchy from Day 1.

I'm glad to have the first day behind us, however, I can only wonder what the next week of hearings will bring.  I am most hopeful that at the end of this circus, we will have Judge Sonia Sotomayor confirmed to be the next member of the Supreme Court! For the most gender neutral coverage, I'd be sure to stay tuned into CSPAN for updates over the week.

Photo credit: Doug Mills/The New York Times