Posted on 06/28/2007 7:58:01 PM PDT by LdSentinal
Just say no.
The Senate's Democratic majority -- joined by all Republicans who purport to be moderate -- must tell President Bush that this will be their answer to any controversial nominee to the Supreme Court or the appellate courts.
The Senate should refuse even to hold hearings on Bush's next Supreme Court choice, should a vacancy occur, unless the president reaches agreement with the Senate majority on a mutually acceptable list of nominees.
And no Bush nominee to a lower court deserves any deference now that we learn that U.S. Appeals Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh may have misled the Senate during his confirmation hearings. Kavanaugh claimed he was not involved in administration discussions about setting the rules for the treatment of enemy combatants. The Post reported that he was.
Although a spokeswoman for Kavanaugh insisted that his testimony was "accurate," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said, "I don't believe that he was truthful with us."
As for the Supreme Court, we now know that the president's two nominees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, are exactly what many of us thought they were: activist conservatives intent on leading a judicial counterrevolution. Yesterday's 5 to 4 ruling tossing out two school desegregation plans was another milestone on the court's march to the right.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Nope. You need 61 to break the filibuster.
We didn’t have 61 to get Roberts and Alito confirmed.
There's going to be pushback from the Left on this. They will see this as an assault even on Brown v. Board of Education, and will not be complicit even with another Roberts or Alito.
We had a Republican Senate and a Republican Judiciary Committee.
There was the threatened “nuclear option” by the Republicans if the President’s nominees weren’t given a floor vote. That was forestalled by the gang of 14 agreement engineered by McCain to allow candidates to move forward in order to prevent the nuclear option from removing judicial candidates as legitimate candidates for filibuster.
In other words, there was a trade. No nuke for up/down vote.
Is the “nuclear option” still viable?
I agree with you.
The only seated judge the President will get will be a moderate (read: liberal) or a recess appointment.
He would not even get Miers through. She’d be too conservative.
“Controversial” = strict constructionist...believes the Constitution means what it says, from the original document.
Not with the democrats in charge of the Senate. That has to be forced by the majority leader....who is now Harry Reid.
I guess it will have to be done the “Clarence Thomas” way back in 1991.
Up until President Bush’s term there was a gentleman’s agreement in the Senate that judicial nominee’s would not be filibustered.
Apparently, all the gentleman in the Democratic Party retired.
this idiot puts the "moron" in Oxymoron, doesn't he?
I’d rather have a couple of more Clarence Thomases.
Poor E.J. Can’t deal with two new additions that interpret the Constitution strictly? Alito and Roberts are far from activists, he knows that. Scalia is more of an activist, at times, but these two clearly are not.
E.J.’s problem is that they are simply doing their job, and that means activist liberal decisions are being steadily carefully eroded.
they never should have existed in the first place.
Awww. I might like to see Meiers replace Souter.
what makes me the sickest is the correspondence
dinner where they give awards.EJ will get one for this piece and Dubya will have to shake his hand
I’d hand him a grenade
This writer exemplifies what is wrong in Washington D.C.
The whipping Post is crying because the Supreme Court did not go along with sanctioned racism.
Folks it’s time to clean house and the sooner the better.
Just like Clinton did, right? And just like Hillary will do, right? And are we allowed to dig through nominees trash like liberals do?
"If another conservative replaces a member of the court's moderate-to-liberal bloc, the country will be set on a conservative course for the next decade or more, locking in today's politics at the very moment when the electorate is running out of patience with the right."
E.J., I wouldn't say the entire electorate is completely out of patience with the right. Afterall, we have managed to stifle that dreadful immigration bill. It's mostly you and your moonbat buddies.
No one ever was sure where she’d really stand....
Most were suggesting she’d be another Sandra Day.
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.