Democrats standing in the doorway AGAIN!
Posted on 04/21/2005 5:45:57 PM PDT by neverdem
WASHINGTON, April 20 - As the Senate moves ever closer to a partisan showdown over confirming President Bush's judicial choices, the Judiciary Committee is expected to vote along party lines on Thursday to approve at least two nominees certain to attract a Democratic filibuster in the full Senate.
That is fine with those Republicans and their conservative allies who are pressing for a change in Senate rules to prevent filibusters on judicial nominees, an action that could plunge the chamber into an angry deadlock. The reason the champions of a rule change are pleased is that they believe the two candidates will serve as sympathetic figures and rallying points for their case.
Both nominees are women and state supreme court judges, Priscilla R. Owen of the Texas Supreme Court and Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court. Democrats mounted filibusters against them in Mr. Bush's first term, blocking them from taking seats on the federal appeals courts.
Because Justice Brown is an outspoken, conservative African-American, her candidacy has evoked comparisons to the bruising confirmation battle in 1991 involving the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.
When she went before the Judiciary Committee in 2003, she was, like Justice Thomas at his confirmation hearing, questioned closely over her speeches, which are often laced with vivid and attention-getting language. In April 2000, she told a meeting of the Federalist Society that "where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and ability to control our own destiny atrophies." A result, she said, "is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible."
She told her Senate inquisitors, as Mr. Thomas did in 1991, that her remarks were "just speeches." She said she was "simply stirring the pot a little bit, getting people to think, to challenge them."
The debate about Justice Owen's fitness for the federal bench centers on her dissents from rulings interpreting the Texas law allowing a teenager to obtain an abortion without notifying her parents if she can show a court that she is mature enough to understand the consequences.
In one dissent, Justice Owen said the teenager in the case had not demonstrated that she knew that there were religious objections to abortion and that some women who underwent abortions had experienced severe remorse.
Alberto R. Gonzales, the attorney general, who was a member of the Texas Supreme Court at the time, was in the majority and wrote that the position of the three dissenters was "an unconscionable act of judicial activism." To the dismay of Mr. Gonzales and Justice Owen's supporters, that quote was used to oppose her nomination.
Mr. Gonzales in earlier interviews with The New York Times acknowledged that his words were harsh but said they merely represented judges' disagreeing heatedly over a contentious issue and did not detract from his enthusiasm for Justice Owen's nomination.
In the summer of 2002, Mr. Gonzales, who was the White House counsel at the time, sought to minimize the impact of his remarks. He acknowledged that calling someone a "judicial activist" was a serious accusation, especially among Republicans who have used that term as an imprecation against liberals.
But he added: "I know what President Bush expects in nominees, and I am absolutely confident that she will do her job in a way that is consistent with the president's philosophy of judging; that is, interpreting the law and not legislating from the bench."
More recently, Mr. Gonzales appeared to have provided a new version of what happened, telling a Senate hearing that he was not referring to Justice Owen when he used the phrase "judicial activist" but to himself. "My comment about an act of judicial activism was not focused at Judge Owen," he said. "It was actually focused at me." His apparent explanation seemed to be that it would have been an act of judicial activism for him if he had done what Justice Owen and her two fellow dissenters had done.
These women are TOP quality judges.. CONFIRM them NOW
The democrat party litmus test is that no practicing Catholic or Fundamentalist Christian will ever be allowed to be a federal judge.
I hope in the name of decency these gals are appointed tomorrow.
His task is to invoke the nuclear option with no political damage and this is the start of a very well-thought out political maneuver.
Democrats standing in the doorway AGAIN!
Three years is a friggin' long time to take to set a stage. You are correct that half the people at this forum think he's a spineless idiot, and half the people are wrong, but that doesn't mean they are the same half.
You watch. We'll discuss this after we see who's correct.
Three years? The 55-45 majority took office in January. You don't honestly think this was going to work with the RINOS at a 51-49 majority, did you?
How you propose Frist make them stay there and talk? Hypnosis?
How you propose Frist make them stay there and talk? Hypnosis?
As soon as they stop talking, the debate is ended, and the vote is called. If the Dems want to block the vote, they have to keep talking.
That's what a filibuster is; not to be confused with this "gentleman's agreement" filibuster that is currently employed in the Senate, where debate is constantly set aside and renewed after other business.
I don't think it will work with the RINO's now. That's why Frist hasn't pulled the trigger. But it is the fault of the Senate party leadership for not being ballsy enough to enforce party discipline on this most urgent of business. They ought to be threatening Snowe, Collins, McCain, Chafee, et al with Political Siberia if they don't back the play. No committee chairs, no pork projects, no pet bills supported - NOTHING.
The Senate Republicans are still operating under the impression that the Senate is a Gentleman's Club, while the Dems are treating it like a game of Rollerball. Until Frist and the Leadership put on some brass knuckles, Fat Teddy and his meat puppet, Reid, will continue to roll the RINOs on every critical issue.
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.