Specter warns Bush on high court nominations

Houston Chronicle ^ | 11/3/2004 | LARA JAKES JORDAN

[joesbucks]

PHILADELPHIA -- The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush today against putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.

Sen. Arlen Specter, fresh from winning a fifth term in Pennsylvania, also said the current Supreme Court now lacks legal "giants" on the bench.

"When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely," Specter said, referring to the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.

"The president is well aware of what happened, when a bunch of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster," Specter added, referring to Senate Democrats' success over the past four years in blocking the confirmation of many of Bush's conservative judicial picks. "... And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning."

With at least three Supreme Court justices rumored to be eyeing retirement, including ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Specter, 74, would have broad authority to reshape the nation's highest court. He would have wide latitude to schedule hearings, call for votes and make the process as easy or as hard as he wants.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., expressed confidence Wednesday that Bush will have more success his second term in winning the confirmation of his judicial nominees.

"I'm very confident that now we've gone from 51 seats to 55 seats, we will be able to overturn this what has become customary filibuster of judicial nominees," Frist said in Orlando, Fla.

Legal scholar Dennis Hutchinson said Specter's message to the White House appears to be "a way of asserting his authority" as he prepares to chair the Judiciary Committee when Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is term-limited from keeping the post next year.

"What he may be trying to do is say, 'Don't just think that I'm going to process what you send through. I have standards, I'm going to take an independent look, you have to deal with me,'" said Hutchinson, a law professor at the University of Chicago.

When asked Wednesday about Specter's impending chairmanship, another Republican on the panel, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, did not offer a ringing endorsement.

"We'll have to see where he stands," said Cornyn, a close friend of Bush who worked to get all of the president's nominees through the Senate. "I'm hoping that he will stand behind the president's nominees. I'm intending to sit down and discuss with him how things are going to work. We want to know what he's going do and how things are going to work."

While Specter is a loyal Republican -- Bush endorsed him in a tight Pennsylvania GOP primary -- he routinely crosses party lines to pass legislation and counts a Democrat, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, as one of his closest friends.

A self-proclaimed moderate, he helped kill President Reagan's nomination of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court and of Jeff Sessions to a federal judgeship. Specter called both nominees too extreme on civil rights issues. Sessions later became a Republican senator from Alabama and now sits on the Judiciary Committee with Specter.

Despite a bruising challenge from conservatives this year in Pennsylvania's GOP primary, Specter won re-election Tuesday by an 11-point margin by appealing to moderate Republicans and ticket-splitting Democrats, even as Pennsylvania chose Democrat John Kerry over Bush.

A former district attorney, Specter also bemoaned what he called the lack of any current justices comparable to legal heavyweights like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo and Thurgood Marshall, "who were giants of the Supreme Court."

"With all due respect to the (current) U.S. Supreme Court, we don't have one," he said.

Though he refused to describe the political leanings of the high court, Specter said he "would characterize myself as moderate; I'm in the political swim. I would look for justices who would interpret the Constitution, as Cardozo has said, reflecting the values of the people

[RGSpincich]

And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning

I would expect you to be mindful of who you're talking to. Are you so lame that you can't speak personally with the President regarding your concerns?

[blackdog]

You're brilliant! Bush should nominate Sphincter to the Supreme Court and Angus Sphincter could watch as his republican majority refuses to vote on his appointment! Once he demands they do, the senate majority can vote him down.

The ultimate political lesson in shame.I like it!

[GratianGasparri]

Both Republicans and Democrats (and Specter who claims to be the former, but acts like the latter) ought to remember who won this election for Bush -- Casey Democrats.

[sauropod]

I see the Sphincter breaks wind again.

It should be Sen. Toomey, not 6 more years of Snarlin' Arlen.

[7thson]

I think we need to bombard Frist's office with email, letters, and phone calls telling him to replace this guy. He can do it, Senate procedure allows him to! This article makes me mad. Calling this clown a loyal Republican when he did not campaign for our President or any other Republican in PA! And the audacity to make this statement when he owes his current position to our President and Vice-President! He has no loyalty to anyone except NOW and as Ann Coulter says, they keep guys like him on the leash until the real deal comes along. Just look at the clown that was stripped of power for being a lecherous drunk, another "moderate" Republican Senator - I forget his name just now.

[7thson]

They already did. It cost them Senate seats but still no judge for us!

[Area51]

Where's Ira Inhorn when you need him?

[citizen]

I sincerely wish Spectre would have lost.

Me too. I'd gladly sacrifice a seat to be rid of this pompous ass.

[blackdog]

The Casey debacle during the 1992 Democrat conevntion was a moment of shame for the world to witness. It was pivotal in putting the Democrats on display for being the most unethical, intolerant bunch of canibals dining in a daycare.

All democrats who think loyalty exists within that party should rethink their fantasy reality.

[blackdog]

Ira Einhorn is out shopping for some good sturdy luggage.

[gunnedah]

This piece of crap sould be put on the back burner by the Republicans. He along with the other socialist Republicans from the blue states have run roughshod over the Republicans to long.
Thses liberal are in the same camp together and must be outed. They are nothing more than spies and pacifist for the Democrats.They should come into the camp or announce they are not really Republicans and call for special elections back at their home base. Of course they would probably win again but show them for what they are,they come from Democrat States anyway are are just used to spy,subvert and neutralize the Republican Party anyway. They like Kerry are traitors.

[gunnedah]

This piece of crap sould be put on the back burner by the Republicans. He along with the other socialist Republicans from the blue states have run roughshod over the Republicans to long.
Thses liberal are in the same camp together and must be outed. They are nothing more than spies and pacifist for the Democrats.They should come into the camp or announce they are not really Republicans and call for special elections back at their home base. Of course they would probably win again but show them for what they are,they come from Democrat States anyway are are just used to spy,subvert and neutralize the Republican Party anyway. They like Kerry are traitors.

[thingumbob]

"We'll have to see where he (Spector) stands," said Cornyn, a close friend of Bush

*snip*

I'm intending to sit down and discuss with him how things are going to work. We want to know what he's going do and how things are going to work."

Maybe Spector will not get the chairmenship.....it looks like the Republicans may deep six him if he's off the reservation and with the threats he just made to Bush in this article it looks like he's already off the reservation......

Stay tuned it's gonna get interesting.

[eno_]

At this point we need to use all means neccessary to turn Specter into a pile of d*ckless damaged goods with zero influence.

Take out key members of his staff with scandals.

Take out his backers in retribution.

Make sure nobody wants to touch him.

[stig]

Frist can take care of this.

Exactly, it's not like Spector delivered PA for Bush. With the gain of seats in the Senate Spector should stf up and let the process play out. All conservatives want are strict constructionists. The constitution means what is says a pretty simple concept. If Specter wants it to mean something else he should amend it, not force his blue state view of judges on us.

[The Hound Passer]

Just when you think it's safe to come out the RINOs attack. I heard a report on FOX this AM that Chafee was considering switching parties yesterday, but then reconsidered when he realized he'd be missing out on of all the goodies being in the majority party. What an @ss.

What really kills me is the disloyalty. When a president selects judicial nominees the only reason the Judicial Committee should refuse to let the whole Senate vote on that nominee is if the nominee is professionally unqualified.

The fact of the matter is, I'm afraid, is that certain RINOs are media whores, and their own celebrity ranks above all else. They know blocking a Bush nominee will get them heaps of praise in the MSM. Sad. Ted Kennedy can just step back and laugh.

It'll be interesting to see how the Admin and Frist approach this looming episode.

[IronJack]

And the president warned newly- (and barely-) elected senator Arlen Specter that if he didn't shut his cake hole, he would find himself hanging coats in the Senate cloakroom.

[Pharlap]

Yes. The process for doing this would go along the following lines. The Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, after caucusing with the Republican leadership and counting the votes, would at the start of the new Senate session move the rules for adoption for the governance of the new Senate. This would probably happen after a Rules Committee hearing and debate on a proposal to change the filibuster/cloture rule (Rule XXII). It is really the cloture requirement (60 votes) that is the key, not the filibuster itself. The Committee vote would go along party lines, and the Committee would vote out the new rules for floor debate. After debate on the rule to change filibuster/cloture, it is likely that no other rule will be changed, the question on adopting the new Rules would be called. The presiding officer of the Senate during floor debate would rule against any attempt to filibuster the proposed rules (because until there is a new rule there can be no filibuster which is merely part of the rules of a prior Senate and, as such, would not be binding on the new Senate unless and until adopted by a majority of the new Senate. Note: the Constitution is very clear on when super majorities shall apply, e.g., treaty ratification. IN ALL OTHER INSTANCES, A SIMPLE MAJORITY SHALL GOVERN. And, Article I, Section 3, Clause 4, provides that the Vice President shall be the President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, "unless they be equally divided." Thereby, codifying the simple majority mandate, except when the Constitution expressly provides for a super majority). When floor debate is concluded, the vote on the Rules for the new Senate would be by simple majority, with a tie vote being broken by the Vice President in his constitutional capacity as Senate President. Everything will work as long as the are 50 votes for the new Rules.

[PA BOOKEND]

Unfortunately, Specter probably realizes he is a lame duck (highly unlikely to be in any condition to run again in 6 years) and, therefore has nothing to lose by being as obnoxious as he wants to be. I used to be what is called a "broken glass Republican". Now, I call myself a broken glass conservative. I wrote in Toomey's name and would have crawled over broken glass to vote AGAINST Specter. Hopefully, Santorum has learned a lesson and will convey his mea culpa to his constituency. Otherwise. . . bring on the broken glass!

[blanknoone]

I would love to see the President and Frist call Specter into the oval office. Politely offer him coffee. Then tell him to keep his trap shut and give him an earful about his betrayal.

"We stood by you in your primary, when we had a real Republican giving you a run for your money. Our support saved your sorry @$$. You turned around and betrayed us. We saved you so you could help us, and you BLEEPed us. You not only BLEEPed us, you could have done a lot for your party. Several house seats in your home base of the Philly suburbs lost because you didn't support them. You abandoned us. And now you have the temerity to lecture us about appointments you jack BLEEP?

"Hey chucklehead, the President makes court appointments, not the judiciary committee. And if you'll note, you are supposed to be evaluating them for competence, not their politics. There are no litmus tests. Oh and by the way, you are now in charge of coat check at the cloak room, not the judiciary. You ran on 'My clout is Pennsylvania's clout' well, good luck next time without any clout. Now get the BLEEP out of my office.