[neverdem]

They were approved by the Judiciary Committee. Click on the link in comment# 102. Then go down about ten lines from the top of the list and find a linked "Page: S1340". You have to do it that way. If I linked it directly, then you would find that thomas.loc.gov uses a temporary URL for these citations. These editorials, among others, apparently were entered into the Congressional Record.

EXECUTIVE SESSION -- (Senate - March 09, 2000)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--snip--

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD several editorials supporting Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

[From the Los Angeles Times, Feb. 6, 2000]

Judge Deserves Rousing Approval

Perhaps this week the full Senate will finally take up the nomination of Judge Richard Paez to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. With a decisive vote to confirm Paez, the Senate can redeem itself after its disgraceful treatment of this worthy jurist.

--snip--

[From the Los Angeles Times, Jan. 20, 2000]

Infamous Anniversary for Courts

Next Tuesday, four long years will have passed since President Clinton first nominated U.S. District Judge Richard A. Paez to a seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It's a sorry moment.

--snip--

[From the Washington Post, March 3, 2000]

The Paez and Berzon Votes

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has indicated that the Senate will finally hold up-or-down votes on judicial nominees Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon by March 15. Judge Paez has waited four years for the Senate to consider his nomination, and Ms. Berzon has waited two. Both nominees to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are well qualified. It is time both were confirmed.

[AaronInCarolina]

They were approved by the Judiciary Committee. Click on the link in comment# 102. Then go down about ten lines from the top of the list and find a linked "Page: S1340". You have to do it that way. If I linked it directly, then you would find that thomas.loc.gov uses a temporary URL for these citations. These editorials, among others, apparently were entered into the Congressional Record.

Thanks for the info. This is the first I have heard of an example of a nominee blocked outside of the committee.

If I might, I would suggest that in this case the tactic used in the Paez case was still a mildly less objectionable one than that used by the minority Democrats currently. Those invoking this tactic were members of the majority, most of whom may have been against that nominee. I admit, it is a weak distinction, but majority status does confer upon a party certain perks that minority status does not. Had the Republicans who employed this tactic been in the minority party, that certainly would have been equivalent to what the democrats are currently doing. They weren't.