Posted on 05/02/2006 6:11:18 PM PDT by RWR8189
WASHINGTON - The Senate's top Democrat on Tuesday said he is considering a filibuster of two of President Bush's judicial nominees, saying one may have been involved in the administration's policy on torture and the other ruled in a case in which he had a clear conflict of interest.
"The answer is yes, a possible filibuster, of course," Reid told reporters in answer to a question about the nomination of White House aide Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The other nominee is federal judge Terrence Boyle, who Bush wants to send to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.
Kavanaugh's negatives, Reid added, "pale in comparison to Boyle." Reid said he had read in an online article that Boyle had bought stock in General Electric midway through presiding over a pension lawsuit against the company. Then Boyle ruled against the plaintiff's claims of long-term and pension disability benefits.
"He not only shouldn't be a trial court judge as he is, but to think that he should be elevated to a circuit court of appeals is outrageous," Reid said.
The White House said Kavanaugh was not involved in crafting detainee policy and that Boyle did not use his office for personal gain.
"There were a handful of cases over the years in which it appears that recusal was warranted," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. "But Judge Boyle has never intentionally participated in any matter in which he should have recused himself, nor has there been any suggestion that he overlooked any conflict or used his office for private gain."
Reid's remarks threw fuel on a smoldering partisan fight over Bush's judicial nominations in a midterm election year in which both parties hoped to use the issue to score points — and money — with their bases.
Majority Leader Bill Frist, a possible presidential contender in 2008, served notice last week that he wants the Senate to confirm both men this year.
"If the Minority Leader is looking to pick a fight on judges, we're ready," said Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas.
First nomination up is Kavanaugh's, which could be reported out of the Judiciary Committee by a party line vote as early as Thursday. Democrats, however, are pressing for another hearing and more documents in an effort to find out whether Kavanaugh was involved in White House policies on torture, the National Security Agency's wiretapping program and Bush's relationship with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Specter has said he would consider another hearing if it would elicit more information than came from Kavanaugh's previous one in 2004. Asked Tuesday if might instead press ahead with a committee vote Thursday on Kavanaugh, Specter replied: "Still thinking about it. I am working on it."
For his part, Kavanaugh told Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., Thursday that he did not play an active role in Bush's secret domestic wiretapping program or in any dealings with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Schumer said he did not ask Kavanaugh about his role in the torture policy. But White House spokeswoman Perino said, "Mr. Kavanaugh was not involved in any detainee policy development."
"He tried to assure me that he was not what you'd call an ideologue, that he would follow judicial opinion and that's why he wanted to be a judge," Schumer said after the 20-minute meeting.
Kavanaugh, a former aide to special prosecutor Kenneth Starr and now White House staff secretary, was nominated to the post in 2003 but his nomination has languished amid Democratic concerns.
After Kavanaugh, Frist said he intended to next bring up the nomination of Boyle. A former aide to retired Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., he was nominated in Bush's first term, but a vote on him was blocked by former Sen. John Edwards, the Democrats' vice presidential candidate in 2004.
This time, Reid and other Democrats are pointing to a report by Salon.com and the Center for Investigative Reporting. The report said that since Boyle's May 2001 nomination to the appeals court, he has issued orders in at least nine cases that involved five different corporations in which he reported stock holdings.
The report said those rulings — whether favorable to the company or not — represented a breach of judicial ethics.
time to FREEP all of our pubbie reps! And don't be polite about it. Send 'em a box of Jello and tell 'em to put some spine into it (better just send a PHOTO of Jello. These days, you'd be sitting in jail for a couple years while they determined if or not the Jello powder was a safe substance.
That is absolutely correct.
For example, the scumbag liberal newsrooms are constantly bemoaning the situation in some states (See: California) where taxes can only be raised by a super-majority vote of the legislature.
On the other (hypocritical) hand they would simply LOVE a state where taxes could only be REDUCED by a super majority vote, because that would "protect government" from politicians who want to "pander to taxpayers" (that exact phrase was used in a Philadelphia Inquirer editorial).
Reid himself is tiresome...
An "online article?" If we go by every "online article," Harry Reid should be doing 75 years in Leavenworth.
No it takes a supermajority to outright change Senate rules mid-session.
That's the whole point of the "nuclear option"
Frist could have adopted new rules by majority vote when the 109th Congress first met, but not now.
In order to implement the nuclear option, cloture has to fail, and a point of order must be raised.
Okay. Thanks for that clarifying info.
I stand corrected.
Regards,
LH
I would say, watch for it during the summer. One more good reason for the 06 elections should be fought for by our side.
Do you think that we could hold a "no demonrat freedom day" and the California Freeps on one side of the border, Nevada freeps on the other and block the northern migration that spends money in his state? NAWWWW
Bingo. This is a tactic that will be used over and over again. Quote some online source, get the LMSM to pickup the story in the form of accusations by Reid or whatever leftist-pol, then later as the truth comes out blame the online source (in this case salon.com.) while maintaining it is the "seriousness of the charge."
It's call have your cake and eat it too.
Further evidence of what stupid mugs the Republicans in the "Gang of 14" are.
"Extraordinary circumstances" are very easy to come up with, if you want to. And the Rats want to. The Dim Bulb from Searchlight is just their rat-faced front man.
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.