Posted on 05/14/2005 7:02:43 AM PDT by yoe
The sniping over President Bush's judicial nominees is reaching critical mass, with the Senate expected to vote soon on the so-called nuclear option -- a Senate rule change that would end Democrat filibusters of judicial nominees.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid prompted outrage from Republicans on Thursday, when he criticized one of those stalled judicial nominees on the Senate floor.
"Henry Saad would have been filibustered anyway," Reid said. "He's one of those nominees. All you need to do is have a member go upstairs and look at his confidential report from the F.B.I., and I think we would all agree there is a problem there."
Reid didn't elaborate, but Republicans erupted.
"It is unclear whether non-Judiciary Committee Senators are even allowed to read a nominee's FBI files, which are highly confidential, but they sure as heck should not be talking about it on TV from the Senate floor," said Sean Rushton, the executive director of the Committee for Justice, a group that is lobbying for an up-or-down vote on President Bush's seven stalled nominees.
"Can you think of a better way to trash someone's reputation -- say that there is bad stuff from an FBI investigation in a file somewhere and leave that hanging? This is character assassination of the lowest order and completely improper," Rushton said.
Judge Saad, who now sits on the Michigan Court of Appeals, has been nominated to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (in Cincinnati).
In his speech on the Senate floor Thursday, Sen. Reid criticized Saad, but he also offered to stop the Democrat filibuster of three other nominees from Michigan -- if Senate Republicans don't invoke the nuclear option.
No way, Republicans indicated: Senate Majority Leader Frist on Thursday continued to insist on an up-or-down vote for all of President Bush's nominees.
'Unmitigated gall'
The Center for Individual Freedom, a free market advocacy group, called Reid's criticism of Saad irresponsible and unconscionable: "This marks a new low in the obstructionists' campaign to smear nominees to the federal bench, and signals the Democrats' utter desperation," said CFIF President Jeffrey Mazzella.
"Senator Reid has the unmitigated gall to imply that something in Judge Saad's F.B.I. file raises suspicion. Of course, Senator Reid offers no specifics, and everything we know about Judge Saad contradicts Senator Reid's unsubstantiated attack."
The Center for Individual Freedom notes that Judge Saad was first nominated to the federal bench in 1992; nominated again in 2001; and re-nominated in 2003 and 2005. He has been vetted repeatedly, but his nomination has never come up for a yes-or-no vote in the full Senate.
"By attacking Judge Saad through implication and innuendo, Senator Reid leads listeners to conclude the worst," Mazzella said. "With his unsubstantiated charges, Senator Reid unfairly and irresponsibly defames Judge Saad."
CFIF said Americans should expect better behavior from the Senate minority leader. "And Senator Reid should know better than to stand on the floor of the U.S. Senate and slander a nominee to the federal bench just to score political points."
CFIF said it would like to know how Sen. Reid gained access to Judge Saad's FBI file in the first place.
Judge Saad's supporters praise his integrity, intellect, thoughtfulness and fair-mindedness.
But the liberal opponents, such as People for the American Way, said Saad's record "raises troubling questions in the areas of workers' rights [sexual harassment cases] and consumer rights, and also reflects a willingness to engage in judicial activism, for which his colleagues have appropriately criticized him."
Democrat Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan have opposed the nominations of the four Michigan judges, partly because Republicans blocked President Clinton's nominees to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (including the wife of Levin's cousin).
The Senate doesn't change its rules lightly, but filibusters have never been applied to judicial nominations until President Bush took office, and that's created the current quandary.
Many Republicans say it is unconstitutional to require a 60-vote test for judges (60 votes are needed to end a filibuster), rather than the simple majority (51 votes) that the Constitution requires for confirmation.
US Senators are above the law - a precedent that has been well established. ;)
"In his speech on the Senate floor Thursday, Sen. Reid criticized Saad, but he also offered to stop the Democrat filibuster of three other nominees from Michigan -- if Senate Republicans don't invoke the nuclear option."
This is the most notable part of the whole issue. The Harry Reid would have the OK to make such an offer if his leftist minions (Schumer, Clinton, Kennedy, Boxer) weren't worried about their tactics backfiring.
Is there any other possible explanation for Reid offering such a concession?
Not so, at least for the last 120 years or so...........only for legislative issues.
Beeuutifully put! Bump & PING!
Pray for W and Our Troops
... but did not the ladies of TWU visit God's country (aka Aggieland, of course) often by train?
Gig 'Em indeed!
Trajan88; TAMU Class of '88; Law Hall (may it R.I.P.) Ramp 9 Mule; f.u.p.!
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.