Posted on 03/01/2005 10:16:39 AM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 - When William G. Myers III appears before the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, it will mark the beginning of another chapter in the fight between President Bush and the Senate Democrats over judicial nominations.
Mr. Myers, one of 10 nominees blocked by Democratic filibusters last term, is being put forward again, this time as a candidate whose case might herald an era of compromise. Some Republicans hope that approval of Mr. Myers, nominated by Mr. Bush to be a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, might break a logjam and allow both sides to return to a normal level of hostility in place of the intense rancor the issue has produced for more than three years.
Indeed, Mr. Myers has been selected by Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania and the new chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to be the first to go forward for the explicit reason that he may have a good chance of being confirmed and breaking the deadlock.
Then again, others, mostly Democrats, say that they expect Mr. Myers's confirmation journey to end as the last one did - in defeat for the administration and with continued animosity between the White House and Senate Democrats.
Mr. Myers, who spent much of his career as a lobbyist for the ranching and mining industries, is now a lawyer in Idaho after having served as the top lawyer in the Interior Department during Mr. Bush's first term. The issue that was debated before and will be again is whether his background and outspoken opposition to environmental advocacy groups makes him an especially poor choice or an especially good choice to sit on the Ninth Circuit.
Those who say it is a poor choice note Mr. Myers's frequent speeches over the years deploying the strong language of ranchers and other Western landowners who complain that they suffer oppression at the hands of federal environmental regulators. Mr. Myers once said, for example, that regulations were akin to King George's tyranny over the American colonies.
At his last confirmation hearing, opponents noted that the Ninth Circuit, which is based in San Francisco and covers nine western states, was regularly confronted with environmental issues. The critics frequently described the nomination as asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
Supporters of Mr. Myers replied with what became a regular argument: his views should have no bearing on his appointment because he would no longer be an advocate for his lobbying clients, but an independent judge whose thinking would be unrelated to his background.
This time, however, his supporters are trying a new argument, acknowledging that he is indeed a staunch conservative and an advocate for less reach in environmental laws. Mr. Specter said that he believed that Mr. Myers should be confirmed precisely because of those views and added that his confirmation would bring balance to a court widely recognized as being liberal.
"I think that William Myers would give some balance to the Ninth Circuit, and that is going to be one of the arguments I am going to make," Mr. Specter said last week.
The Myers nomination thus raises two interesting issues: whether someone so closely identified with the advocacy of an issue is fit to decide questions on that issue fairly, and whether ideology should be used as a balancing tool in shaping the courts. Because Mr. Myers has rarely appeared in court or written on the law, the American Bar Association committee on the courts gave him a mixed evaluation of his fitness to be a judge, with a minority saying that he was unqualified and a majority that he was qualified. No members said he was highly qualified.
After Tuesday's hearing, the committee is expected to vote on the nomination in the next two weeks, and unless there is a change among the Democrats, Mr. Myers should win approval by a vote of 10 to 8, the ratio of Republicans to Democrats on the committee.
The real test will come when Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader, brings Mr. Myers up for a vote on the Senate floor. Republicans hold 55 of the 100 seats, but they would require 60 votes to foil a Democratic filibuster. With only 51 seats in the last Congress, the Republicans could not attract enough defecting Democrats to break the filibuster. But Mr. Specter says he thinks they are closer this time.
On Thursday, the committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Judge Terrence W. Boyle for an appeals court seat on the Fourth Circuit, based in Richmond, Va. Judge Boyle, who serves on the district court in North Carolina and is a protégé of former Senator Jesse Helms, did not get a hearing during the last Congress. He is opposed by some law enforcement groups who object to some of his rulings in employment cases regarding police officers.
The Alliance for Justice, a liberal group that takes positions on judicial nominees, said that Judge Boyle had been reversed in more than 150 cases in his 20 years on the bench.
ping
Just deploy the nuclear option and get over with will you Specter? For sh..sakes the demo/socialists are never going to let anybody to the right of Lyn Stewart thru anyway so fu..'em and just do it!!!!!!!!
To "those who say", etc., I would quote Patrick Henry: "Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you."
Myers is right.
This would only seem like "strong language" to someone abysmally ignorant of history.
Get used to it. More is coming.
"Let's make a deal. All you Dems from Bush states up for re-election in '06, vote for my nominee or I'll personally visit your state a dozen times down the campaign stretch. And I won't be sayin' particularly nice things about you."
Yeah. Why think things through when we can just cyberscream at the fella who wouldn't even control the nuclear option (as I understand it)?
But what do I know, I guess I'm just a cyberscreamer apprantly not as practiced in the art of nuance as you must be.
If "nuance" means trying to sort out fact from fiction, then guilty as charged.
NUKE DEM!
So sort away.
Hmmm. There's nothing here about requiring a "super majority" to consent to the nomination. Seems as though KKK Byrd used the "nuclear" option when he had the job Frist now has. What's the problem? Change the rules and don't look back.
Hmmm. There's nothing here about requiring a "super majority" to consent to the nomination. Seems as though KKK Byrd used the "nuclear" option when he had the job Frist now has. What's the problem? Change the rules and don't look back.
Just like the 24/7 crowd had it all figured out.
Why didn't President Bush recess appoint all these judges. Then the dems would have to do an up/down vote to get rid of them. Wouldn't they?
Seriously, I'm perplexed you kept posting that you are cautiously weighing the facts, as opposed to rushing to a conclusion. I must be missing something I didn't realize this was such a complex issue. I will admit that the consequences of the nuclear option may have a further polarizing effect but really should we acquiesce out of fear of reprisal when the democrats one day return to majority?
I hope you don't think they will ever rule from the majority with benevolence no matter what the Republicans do. And for sure the MSM will cut us no slack or give bonus points for playing nicely in the sandbox.
I don't pretend to have an answer to this very complex issue. At a minimum I wish the President and Pubbies would publicize it more, but I'm also well aware of the power of the media. Frist and the GOP leaders are well aware of the nuclear option, and for whatever reason they have chosen not to exercise it yet. And they've been kicking some butt at the ballot box lately. So they're doing something right. (My guess is they're saving the nuke for a Supreme Court nominee, but who really knows?)
No. Their terms would automatically expire at the end of the Congressional session in which they were appointed. (I'm 95% sure that's correct. Someone will come along, hopefully, and confirm this or correct me.)
IIRC, they just get a temporary appointment until the next session of Congress starts. Then this dance starts all over again.
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.