[My2Cents]

The best course of action for Republicans may be to take their case to the public vigorously during the next election.

This seems to be the plan. Look at how far the charge of "obstructionism" over the Homeland Security bill took the GOP in 2002. Obstructionism over judicial nominations -- not just obstructionism that threatens legislation, but obstructionism that undermines the Constitution -- could be quite a lethal weapon in the hands of the Republicans. If, as is conjectured, one or two Supreme Ct. justices retire this summer, the idea of the Democrats obstructing one or two Bush appointees to the Supreme Ct., and likely the nomination of a new Chief Justice, should put the Democrats into a corner, particularly if he nominates highly qualified judges. This kind of obstructionism might play well among ivy league law school faculty, but it won't play well with voters.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

I think the Dem's used up their political capital on the minor filibuster and forgot about the supreme test they might be facing. And now they look bad even to their own party.

[Gritty]

Should Schumerism become orthodoxy among judges, the consequences for our constitutional democracy will be grim.

Scummer is a pox on this nation.

Period!

[syriacus]

I especially like the word "Schumerism."

Thanks for posting this wonderful article. Bookmarked

[OESY]

For much of American history, the guideposts the Senate has relied on to confirm judges are those Alexander Hamilton laid down in The Federalist: integrity, intelligence and temperament, and faithfulness to the rule of law—terms on which Estrada and Owen pass with high marks. But instead of sticking with Hamiltonian standards, Schumer says, senators must make their Number One concern a judge’s “ideology” ....

Well stated. I am tempted to suggest returning the favor in spades, but the better plan would be to throw the bum Schumer out of office next year.

[SJackson]

Another amazing case of FR oneupmanship!

I find the article here, today, dated Nov 12, as First seen in the Wall Street Journal, November 5, 2003, but it was on FR a full six months ago.

Worth a ping.