It's rather simple. Congress can ignore its own rules, as they aren't actually laws, but rather are mere procedural rules.
Posted on 05/10/2003 9:15:08 AM PDT by jmstein7
ACLJ Report: U.S. Senate Can Assert Simple Majority and Immediately End Filibusters of President Bush's Judicial Nominees
(Washington, DC) - The American Center for Law and Justice, an international public interest law firm, today announced in a report just released that a simple majority in the U.S. Senate - 51 Senators - could act immediately to end filibusters in the Senate over two of President Bush's nominees and move those nominations to the full Senate for a vote.
The ACLJ, which has prepared a detailed legal analysis of options available to end the gridlock over judicial nominees, today presented its findings to members of the U.S. Senate including Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, is holding a hearing today on the judicial confirmation process.
"The simple majority principle presents the clearest and best resolution of this conflict involving judicial nominees," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "It is clear through our research and legal analysis that a simple majority of the Senate may determine the rules by which it proceeds and may bring an immediate end to the filibusters. While the Constitution gives great latitude to Congress itself on how to operate, there is nothing in the Constitution to prevent a simple majority of Senators to act to change their rules and bring an end to the obstructionist tactics being used against nominees."
Sekulow said: "It is our hope that a simple majority in the Senate assert its authority and act to bring an end to a destructive strategy aimed at the confirmation process - a process that is clearly broken."
After weeks of research, the ACLJ has presented a 36-page report to members of the U.S. Senate entitled: An End to Nomination Filibusters and the Need for Cloture Motions: Terminating Debate on Confirmation of Judicial Nominees by the Vote of a Simple Majority.
In its report, which is posted at www.aclj.org, the ACLJ examined a number of alternatives available to Senators including seeking approval of the Senate to amend Senate Rule XXII, which requires a two-thirds supermajority to change the rule of 60 votes needed to invoke cloture and end a filibuster. The ACLJ also examined the option of litigating the constitutionality of Senate Rule XXII. And, the ACLJ examined a third option - a decision by the majority in the Senate to assert its authority and move immediately to end the crisis.
The ACLJ concluded that the "clearest and best resolution of the present conflict" is the simple majority option. The ACLJ determined that there is existing legal and Senate precedence that would permit the majority to act - relying on a simple majority - 51 Senators - to change Rule XXII, bring an end to the filibusters, and call for a vote by the full Senate on Miguel Estrada and Priscilla Owen - two nominees who are being blocked.
"There is no easy solution to resolving this current conflict," said Sekulow. "However, there is significant reason to believe that if a willing majority acted immediately to resolve this crisis, those efforts would succeed and survive any legal challenges that may be brought."
The American Center for Law and Justice is an international public interest law firm specializing in constitutional law. The ACLJ is based in Washington, D.C. and its web site address is www.aclj.org.
http://www.aclj.org/resources/judconf/Filibusters.pdf
What's the Reader's Digest version? Or, how about an outline form?
How does the ACLJ say to do it with only 51 votes? If it can't be explained in 3 or 4 simple sentences, the voters will tend to accept the Dims' sloganeering version of their position.
Sorry, but the cat is already out of the bag. Once the Democrats learn of this option they will employ it once they are in power. The Dems have already pushed this into territory where no party has gone before in our 200 plus years of existance. It is time to do something. The Dems will.
What makes you think the Democrats wouldn't do the same thing if they had the chance?
Keep it simple; sieze the moment; authority is generally available to those who are willing to exercise it; rights are frequently established through unexpected actions.
The ACLJ is suggesting that a simple majority sieze the moment and then let the minority overcome the limitations of the low ground.
In this case the executive can probably muster the votes from within their own quorum.
Forget litigation; the courts won't touch the internal Rules of the House or Senate. Forget amending the filibuster Rule; that requires a 2/3rds vote of the Senators present.
Instead, raise a Point of Order on the Senate floor that the filibuster Rule violates the Constitution when applied to judicial nominess, and ask for a ruling from the Chair that it cannot so apply. The Chair (Dick Cheney) accepts the Point and rules against the filibuster. At that point, the ruling of the Chair applies unless a simple majority votes to reverse it.
Since the Democrats under Li'l Tommy Daschle cannot muster a majority, that is game, set and match. Estrada and Owen get confirmed, the filibuster no longer applies to ANY judicial nominees.
That should make it clear.
Congressman Billybob
True, but it's also tough to imagine anything more important than getting some decent people into this broken, liberal-infested judicial system. If something isn't done, Bush will never get a conservative onto the SCOTUS if he gets the opportunity. We're at the point that nuclear war is called for IMO.
MM
It's rather simple. Congress can ignore its own rules, as they aren't actually laws, but rather are mere procedural rules.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.