WASHINGTON -- The opening day of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing in the Senate, punctuated by outbursts from anti-abortion activists, was a mix of sniping, baseball analogies and political posturing.

As senators began to establish on Monday how they would question Sotomayor over the next few days and highlighted what they considered her shortfalls or assets, three key issues emerged: the implication of her now-famous “Wise Latina” comment with respect to her objectivity; the role of empathy in the judiciary; and the high court’s role as law enforcer or lawmaker.

The Judiciary Committee’s Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., the ranking member, began to lay out the the case for his concerns: “I am afraid our system will only be further corrupted as a result of President (Barack) Obama’s views that in tough cases, the critical ingredient for a judge is the ‘depth and breadth of one’s empathy’ as well as ‘their broader vision of what America should be.’”

Sessions said he would not vote for any nominee who allows her background to influence her decisions, saying embracing such an influence means “the umpire calling the game is not neutral,” adding, “empathy for one party is always prejudice against another.”

Other GOP senators also chimed in on the nominee’s ability to be impartial, citing decisions they believe should cause pause. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz, said Sotomayor’s track record as an appellate judge shows her judgments to be inappropriately influenced. “[Sotomayor] appears to believe that her role is not constrained to objectively decide who wins based on the weight of the law, but who, in her opinion, should win.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, addressed Sotomayor’s nomination in the context of what he sees as a Supreme Court that has lost sight of its purpose, saying the court’s role is “not to make new rights as they see fit," and yet the nation’s highest court has “created new rights spun from whole cloth.”

In sharp contrast was Sen. Sheldon White House, D-R.I., who said “The courtroom is supposed to be a place where the status quo could be upended.”

Democrats also questioned the direction of the court. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said the Supreme Court has gone astray, but he had different reasons than his Republican peers, saying decisions have shown a “triumph of ideology over common sense.”

Durbin asserted that Sotomayor’s experience means decisions would be grounded in the needs of people, instead of what can be arcane reasoning of the law.

Sotomayor, who alternated between a forced smile and blank expression while senators made their objections and expectations known, abandoned her diffident appearance when she began her speech as the session wound down.

She began by thanking her mother, who was sitting directly behind her and tried to blink back tears, before outlining her academic and professional achievements. Sotomayor clearly anticipated the concerns she heard from senators and sought to silence doubt that she would be a valuable addition to the court.

“Throughout my 17 years on the bench I have witnessed the human consequences of my decisions,” she said, “Those decisions have been made not to serve the interests of any one litigant, but always to serve the larger interest of impartial justice.”

Sotomayor then laid out her judicial philosophy: “Fidelity to the law. The task of the judge is not to make the law-it is to apply the law,” she said, adding, “my personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.”

The hearings continue Tuesday on Capitol Hill.