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

Skip to comments.

Judicial Review
WSJ ^ | March 27, 2006 | WSJ

Posted on 03/27/2006 5:51:58 AM PST by Brilliant

Everyone deserves a break, even the U.S. Senate. But enough already. It's been two months since Samuel Alito was confirmed to the Supreme Court and it's past time Senate Republicans got back to work confirming appeals-court judges. They won't have 55 seats forever...

Judges are a key issue for the GOP's base, who could stay home on Election Day rather than turn out for Republicans who shilly-shally about confirming President Bush's nominees. There are 17 vacancies on the appeals bench, including nine pending nominations. They deserve to be filled as soon as possible...

An excellent place to start would be to finally vote on Terrence Boyle... Judge Boyle was in Mr. Bush's original group of appeals-court nominees on May 9, 2001, after having failed to get a vote when he was nominated a decade earlier by the President's father. Judge Boyle, who has served on the federal bench for 22 years, had a hearing more than a year ago and was voted out of the Judiciary Committee in June...

Neither nominee is controversial enough to trigger the no-filibuster deal's "extraordinary circumstances" exemption. Judge Boyle's biggest liability is that he once worked for conservative ex-Senator Jesse Helms. Mr. Myers is opposed by Democrats who don't like Mr. Bush's environmental policies, which Mr. Myers implemented as an Interior Department lawyer...

There are also seven appeals-court nominees awaiting action in the Judiciary Committee, including two -- Brett Kavanaugh and William Haynes -- whose nominations have been languishing for years...

Of the remaining five nominees awaiting action in Judiciary, Randy Smith is taking fire from Dianne Feinstein. Judge Smith's sin is to hail from Idaho, and the California Democrat says the Ninth Circuit seat rightfully belongs to a Californian even though the man he would succeed is also from Idaho. Meanwhile...

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: appointments; courts; judges; judicialnominees; senate; terrenceboyle; wsj
Personally, I don't think Frist is doing a very good job. He needs to be more aggressive.
1 posted on 03/27/2006 5:51:59 AM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Fox News Report Reid will filibuster Saad & Myers - May 29, 2005

Frist is protecting the institution of the Senate from confrontation over the judicial confirmation process. Arlen Specter is facilitating that objective.

At least one more nomination is expected to be reported out of Committee this week, Norman Randy Smith to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit. Hearings are scheduled for Wednesday, March 29th.

Saad has withdrawn from consideration - he withdrew himself on March 23rd. President Bush withdrew Payne's nomination on March 6th.

2 posted on 03/27/2006 6:04:15 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
I don't think Frist is doing a very good job. He needs to be more aggressive.

Frist is a lousy Majority Leader. He'd be a worse President.

3 posted on 03/27/2006 6:04:32 AM PST by peyton randolph (As long is it does me no harm, I don't care if one worships Elmer Fudd.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
I agree completely.

I thought I was the only one who cared about the U.S. Court of Appeals nominees at this point.

This delay and filibuster is a disgrace that must be stopped.

4 posted on 03/27/2006 6:40:02 AM PST by new yorker 77 (FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

"Frist is protecting the institution of the Senate from confrontation over the judicial confirmation process."

Is this a good thing?


5 posted on 03/27/2006 7:58:09 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
"Frist is protecting the institution of the Senate from confrontation over the judicial confirmation process."

Is this a good thing?

In my opinion, it is a REALLY BAD THING. It distorts a fundamental balance of powers as envisioned in the Constitution.

6 posted on 03/27/2006 8:09:49 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

"In my opinion, [Frist protecting the institution of the Senate from confrontation over the judicial confirmation process] is a REALLY BAD THING. It distorts a fundamental balance of powers as envisioned in the Constitution."

Good. You had me scared there for a sec. We agree 100%.


7 posted on 03/27/2006 8:16:20 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

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