1981 - On the hearings of the (now retiring) Sandra Day O'Connor, Senator Kennedy proclaims:
“It is offensive to suggest that a potential justice of the Supreme Court must pass some presumed test of judicial philosophy. It is even more offensive to suggest that a potential justice must pass the litmus test of any single-issue interest group. The disturbing tactics of division and distortion and discrimination practiced by the extremists of the new right have no place in these hearings and no place in the nation's democracy.”
Offensive you say? Now we have this same justice retiring and need to confirm a replacement.
2005 - The same Senator "offensive to suggest" Kennedy states:
“there's going to be an additional test” for Bush-appointed judges … “a commitment to the core values of the Constitution. And the core values of the Constitution now include … a woman's right to choose”.
The Senate will not confirm a judge who does not openly promise to vote pro-abortion. The likes of Rush Limbaugh have often joked that liberalism is a religion and abortion is its sacrament. Sometimes the humor seems to hit a little too close to reality. Lately, considering recent rulings, I'm not so much concerned about conservative vs. liberal in the upcoming judge. I'd just like an originalist vs. an activist judge who reads novel interpretations of the Constitution. What does it say vs. what we (the justices) would like it to say.
Of the recent names thrown around, Senator "no test of judicial philosophy" has been leading the charge.
So I guess judicial philosophy does matter, even in Senator Kennedy's view. One could only wish he saw things that way when Sandra Day O'Connor was being scrutinized back in 1981.