George Will Flops on Judicial Filibuster (Taking Will to task on his latest coulumn)

The National Ledger ^ | March 20, 2005 | Andrew Hyman

[Coastal]

Columnist George F. Will has just come out with another piece about filibusters of judicial nominations. He’s written a lot of great stuff over the years, but not this time. His first piece on this subject was excellent, but then he flipped, and now he has flopped.

On February 27, 2003 Will’s first column on this subject (“Unconstitutional Filibuster”) recognized the continuing dangerous and unacceptable situation in the U.S. Senate:

"If Senate rules, exploited by an anticonstitutional minority, are allowed to trump the Constitution’s text and two centuries of practice, the Senate’s power to consent to judicial nominations will have become a Senate right to require a 60-vote supermajority for confirmations. By thus nullifying the president’s power to shape the judiciary, the Democratic Party will wield a presidential power without having won a presidential election."

But then Mr. Will had a change of mind. On December 6, 2004 he advocated a different approach in his column titled “Shock and Awe In the Senate” where he wrote:

[Congressman Billybob]

I, too, was puzzled by George Will's flipflop on the question of majority vote for confirmation of judicial nominees. Will does not reverse his position that the Advise and Consent Clause requires only a simple majority to confirm such nominees.

How, then, does he legitimately support (now) a requirement that it takes 60 Senators to vote to allow 51 Senators to make a decision? He doesn't deal with that situation.

Perhaps Will is abandoning principle for practicality. Perhaps he is buying the Democrat line for fear of a different future? We accept an unconstitutional position now, because Republicans might want the use of that position in the future? Either way, Will is accepting the idea that the Constitution should be violated for practical reasons -- exactly the same position that Justice Kennedy took in the Simmons case on juvenile death penalties.

Occasionally, George Will forgets where he is, and what he stands for. Sad.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Condi Rice & Pierce Flanigan's Father's Hat"

[thoughtomator]

He just wants to continue to be published in the Washington Post.

[Archon of the East]

If it is as I understand, that the judiciary was intentionally made the "weakest" branch of Government by our framers then why all the fuss? If the judiciary is only to interpret law then why should there be such a fight over nominations? If the Judiciary is in fact stepping outside their Constitutional guidelines then it is incumbent on the people to press our representatives for impeachment. So why does any political pundit deny these facts by now supporting a position that never was? Does George Will actually believe that the democrats would not use any means available given their recent history? Somebody needs to ask him to clarify his position.

[peyton randolph]

Occasionally, George Will forgets where he is, and what he stands for.

Much of what Will writes makes sense in the context of his personal dislike of the Bush family. Will's wife worked for one of 41's primary opponents in '88 (Alexander?). An issue was raised as to his impartiality on ABC given this potential conflict. It made Will look bad. He has never given 41 or 43 favorable treatment.

[StonyBurk]

Will also has flipflopped on Rule of Law- and Congresssional actions in attempt to save a human life,
Terri Schiavo. I used to enjoy George Will but lately he seems affected by Goldwaters dementia.

[Milhous]

Does George Will actually believe that the democrats would not use any means available given their recent history?

Does anyone believe that if Republicans now honor Democrat filibusters that a future Democrat majority will honor Republican filibusters?

[Archon of the East]

Does anyone believe that if Republicans now honor Democrat filibusters that a future Democrat majority will honor Republican filibusters?

Nobody that has any common sense! Thats why I say go for it. I haven't heard a legitimate reason why Republicans should not use whatever option is available to give the nominees a vote.

[Zechariah11]

New spouses may be causing lots of conservatives to go "soft" on their core beliefs.

One might be surprised to read, in other words, that in the 1980s, while still married to his first wife, Will was romantically linked to Lally Weymouth, daughter of Washington Post owner Katharine Graham, according to Washingtonian magazine (1/87). When Will moved out on his wife and children, he found his office furniture dumped on his front lawn with a note reading, "Take it somewhere else, buster" (Salon, 2/12/98).

Did not McCain's first wife heroically stand by him during his POW years? He changed from reliable conservative to maverick after that.

[MinuteGal]

The President will probably have three Supreme Court justices to appoint before his four years are over. His appointments will shape the Court for decades if his appointees are young enough.

I don't give a rat's patootie at this point what will happen in the distant future. A shattered justice system, a tattered Constitution and a devastating social/cultural upheaval will be the result if we don't get some conservative appointees in THIS PRESIDENTIAL TERM.

Thanks a lot, George Will, for getting wobbly at the wrong time and attempting to pull the rug out from under us.

Leni

[Sun]

During the BUSH administration is when SEVERAL Supreme Court judges will probably retire, so NOW is the time to end the judicial filibusters.

I received this from the Center for Reclaiming America (e-mail), and if you can't call them all, please at least call one or two.

If you can't call them, at least e-mail them (but calling is more effective).

THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. PLEASE make that call!

The Center has identified six key senators whose votes may well
decide the fate of the filibuster rules change. We are asking
all member of our online team to contact these individual
senators, urging each to FULLY SUPPORT THE FILIBUSTERING
RULES CHANGE.

*****CALL TO ACTION*****

Even if none of these six senators is your own senator,
please invest the time needed to call each right now.

Here are their names and contact information:

I guess on the weekend, we need to fax or e-mail these guys and the info can be found here:
http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm

Urge each to FULLY SUPPORT THE FILIBUSTERING
RULES CHANGE.



On Monday we can call toll-free at 877-762-8762 or call them directly by using the numbers next to their names.


Sen. Susan Collins (ME) 202-224-2523
Sen. Lamar Alexander (TN) 202-224-4944
Sen. Trent Lott (MS) 202-224-6253
Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME) 202-224-5344
Sen. Chuck Hagel (NE) 202-224-4224
Sen. John Warner (VA) 202-224-2023