Washington ? Frank Ricci, famous for being denied his day in court, had a moment in the sun Thursday.

The New Haven, Conn., firefighter was asked to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee as part of the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Ricci was the name plaintiff in a lawsuit that Republicans have made Sotomayor’s albatross, even as her chances of being approved appeared assured.

Ricci, along with 19 other firefighters, sued after New Haven threw out the results of a promotion test because it feared the test discriminated against minorities. The trial court dismissed the suit, and Sotomayor was part of a three-judge appellate panel that affirmed the trial court.

Last month, the Supreme Court reversed the ruling of Sotomayor’s panel in a 5-4 decision. Throughout Sotomayor’s testimony, Republicans repeatedly hammered Sotomayor over her handling of the case.

Her panel initially upheld the ruling in an unpublished order — and soon amended that to a short unsigned opinion. Some suggested she sought to bury the case because of hostility to the white plaintiffs or even to protect her own chances of promotion to the high court.

Other complained her actions exhibited shoddy legal work.

“Americans have the right to go into our federal courts to have their cases judged based on the Constitution and our laws, not on politics or personal feelings,” Ricci, in dress uniform, told senators.

Another plaintiff, Benjamin Vargas, also testified. Vargas began by congratulating the judge on her nomination and said, “I am Hispanic and proud of the heritage and background that Judge Sotomayor and I share.” He told the panel about the sacrifices he had made to study for the test, keeping him from his three sons.

Vargas echoed a Republican theme heard throughout the hearings: that a judge’s decision should be based on law, not “empathy.”

Vargas referred to a part of the Supreme Court’s Ricci vs. DeStefano decision, in which Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote that plaintiffs should not expect “sympathy” from judges, only fairness.

“We did not ask for sympathy, or empathy,” Vargas said. “We asked only for evenhanded enforcement of the law and … we were denied just that.” Sotomayor has countered she followed established law in her judicial circuit and was bound by precedent. The Supreme Court, she said, fashioned a new legal standard for such test-based employment cases when it decided the case. She said her panel disposed of the case in such routine fashion because the district court had undertaken a lengthy analysis of the firefighters’ claims.

“Judges make mistakes,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. “I don’t necessarily hold it against Judge Sotomayor that she ruled. I don’t think she gave it the proper respect and attention that she should.”

Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., asked both Ricci and Vargas if they believed Sotomayor had acted “in good faith” in adjudicating their claims. Both firefighters demurred, saying they had come to the committee simply to “tell their story.”