Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: gridlock
The Republicans have said no such thing. They have said that requiring a vote would be Constitutional, but that is a long way from saying the Senate rules on cloture are UnConstitutional.

Orrin Hatch has asserted that cloture rules are unconstitutional as applied to the confirmation process.

January 12, 2005, 7:29 a.m.
Crisis Mode
A fair and constitutional option to beat the filibuster game.
By Senator Orrin G. Hatch

... A filibuster occurs most plainly on the Senate floor when efforts to end debate fail, either by objection to unanimous consent or defeat of a cloture motion. During the 108th Congress, Senate Democrats defeated ten majority-supported nominations to the U.S. Court of Appeals by objecting to every unanimous consent request and defeating every cloture motion. This tactic made good on then-Democratic Leader Tom Daschle's February 2001 vow to use "whatever means necessary" to defeat judicial nominations. These filibusters are unprecedented, unfair, dangerous, partisan, and unconstitutional.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/hatch200501120729.asp


7 posted on 04/22/2005 4:27:14 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt

OK, my bad. I would have to think that Orrin Hatch, who is, if nothing else, well versed on the Constitution, was trying to say that Filibusters of judicial nominees is not in keeping with the character or intent of the Constitution. The word UnConstitutional carries special weight these days, as half the laws passed by Congress are Dead Letter in the Circuit Courts.


14 posted on 04/22/2005 4:59:43 AM PDT by gridlock (ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson