Leaders pushing recess option for Pickering (— U.S. Sen. Trent Lott had been the lone vote against)

The Clarion Ledger, ^ | November 21, 2003 | By Ana Radelat

[WKB]

PING

[chiller]

Just one? Screw the libs..appoint them all and let the libs deal with it.

[ClintonBeGone]

A recess appointment would allow Pickering, 66, to sit on the appellate court until the end of 2004. Then, he would be eligible for full retirement benefits because of his age and length of service on the federal bench.

This reads like a gratuitous line inserted by the reporter. In case the reporter needs reminding, he's already going to get those full retirement benefits because of his current position as a federal judge.

[ken5050]

Sounds to me like the judge's congressman son is the point chosen pointman for lobbing a few grenades over at the "other" body...

[WKB]

Sounds to me like the judge's congressman son is the point chosen pointman for lobbing a few grenades over at the "other" body...




I wonder if he is a "Chip" off the ole "blockhead" like my two sons?

[ken5050]

Do they Freep?

[WKB]

Do they Freep?


One does the other is other wise busy

[rcofdayton]

Bush should appoint super partisan conservatives as recess appointments. Make sure the recess appointment is much worse from the Democrats point of view. That way the Democrats will be motivated to confirm the nominee.

[dixiechick2000]

I am really sick of the dem tactics, but think the Republicans should pee or get off the pot.

I hope they do something soon, or let poor Pickering withdraw his name and get on with his life.

[bourbon]

This judicial confirmation mess is so screwed up that it's hard to believe.

I love the Senate Republicans' response to the Democratic filibuster. It is so sublime in its confusion.

They won't change the Senate Rules (which they apparently consider to be sacred) to overcome the filibuster. No, this is so extreme that they even refer to it as "the nuclear option." Never mind that nowhere in the Constitution does it mention that judges have to be approved by anything more than a simple majority vote.

Instead, now they're considering the "slightly less extreme" option of recess appointments. Never mind that they fulminated against Clinton's recess appointments or that many conservative legal commentators believe that recess appointments are themselves unconstitutional.

This tells you a lot about the composition and character of most of our Senators. Changing their own rules and procedures is just too hard, whereas violating the Constitution--well, that's just second nature.

[wardaddy]

note how the Clarion Liar made it appear that Helms blocked Gregory because he was "black".

[Apogee]

"3. The President shall have the power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions, which shall expire at the end of their next session. "

I agree that they need to do something, but my best understanding of the constitution (both word and intent) would be that the president has the right to fill vacancies that occur during a recess, not to use recess as an opportunity to appoint someone the legislature has denied approval.

[wayoverontheright]

Mary Cheh, a law professor at George Washington University, said Democrats' and Republicans' inability to come to terms with their differences over Pickering and other judges has set the stage for a recess appointment.

The Constitution bestows on the Senate the responsibility for "advise and consent", not allowing the judge to come to a vote is abdication of this responsibility, thus, a recess appointment is justified. If the Senate had brought any judge to a full vote and voted the jurist down, I would be the first to say the Pres would have to live with the vote, as the people will have spoken.

[dixiechick2000]

I wasn't suggesting that Pickering receive a recess appointment, although there is precedent that denied nominees have received them. I really don't think he would want a recess appointment.

I am concerned about the filibusters, though, and would like to see the Republicans do something about them.

May I ask you a question? I have read conflicting accounts concerning changes in Senate rules. Does it require a simple majority or a super-majority of Senators to change a rule?

[afuturegovernor]

I'm not sure about the number needed to make a rule change, but I suppose the Democrats could filibuster a rule change too.

[CdMGuy]

Exactly, appoint all of them. The Dems are not going to give in on any of them during 2004. So, Bush has nothing to lose. If he wins the election next November, he can nominate them again. If the Pubs still don't have enough to get the 60 votes, then he can do recess appointments again.

Personally, I just wish that Cheney would go to the Senate and the Pubs call for a vote on all of them, then have Cheney rule that filibusters only apply to bills and not Senate confirmations of Presidential appointments. Then hold the vote. Problem is, certain gutless Pubs are such chicken sh_ts they couldn't bring themselves to stick it to the Dems. The Dems get away with all this stuff because the Pubs refuse to make life miserable for them.

[dixiechick2000]

This is an excerpt from older article by Robert Novak, dated Oct 28, 2003, explaining Frist's strategy. I posted an excerpt earlier, and have just reviewed the contents. Read the next to last paragraph concerning the "Nuclear Solution". It appears that, unless some have changed their minds recently, there are enough gutless Republicans, who will not support fiddling with "the traditions of the Senate", to doom it to failure. Perhaps, as the Judiciary Committee moves forward, some needed Senators will become disgusted enough to change their minds on this. Here's hoping, anyway.

I had forgotten about this article. It answered several questions that I had.

http://www.theunionleader.com/opinion_show.html?article=28185

Now, Frist is about to mount a campaign in three phases, lasting through what’s left of this year’s session.

Phase One: Start this week with a cloture vote on the nomination of U.S. District Judge Charles Pickering Sr. of Mississippi for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans. Pickering, bottled up in the Judiciary Committee during the 2001-02 Democratic interregnum, has just been sent to the Senate floor.

Phase Two: Next, order a cloture vote for the second time on Alabama Attorney General William Pryor for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta. Claims by opponents that Pryor’s “deeply held beliefs” taint him for the court have produced accusations of anti-Catholicism.

Phase Three: Vote on three female nominees. Attempts to get cloture on Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen’s nomination for the 5th Circuit has failed three times. California Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl’s two-year-old nomination for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco is coming to the Senate floor for the first time. Just released by the Judiciary Committee and already threatened with a filibuster is California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, an African-American.

Failure to reach 60 votes for cloture on each of these three women is scheduled to be followed by consideration of the bill co-sponsored by Frist and conservative Democratic Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia. That measure would reduce the number of votes needed to end filibusters on nominations. That, too, will be filibustered in order to defeat it.

All this refocusing is intended to set the scene for a bitter battle in next year’s session of Congress. At that time, an effort may be made to rule out of order a filibuster against judicial nominations — the “so-called” nuclear solution. This would require only 51 votes, but Frist does not even have that many today because of reluctance to tamper with the traditions of the Senate.

Whether or not Bill Frist’s offensive eventually places any of these well-qualified judges on the bench, it will sound a stentorian refusal to surrender. That means a Republican President and a Republican-controlled Senate have not acquiesced in letting Ted Kennedy determine the membership of the federal judiciary.

[dixiechick2000]

I meant to ping you to my post above.

[WKB]

Oh how soon we forget!!