Posted on 11/09/2005 7:38:27 PM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Republican chairman and the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced their opposition Wednesday to a House GOP move to fast-track a break-up of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
House Republicans are including a split of the San Francisco-based court, which covers nine Western states, in a budget-reduction bill that could win House approval as soon as Thursday and would be immune from Senate filibuster. The 9th circuit measure was not in the Senate's version of the budget bill, and opposition from key senators could keep it out of the final version of the bill that will be crafted by House and Senate negotiators.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and ranking Democrat Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., declared their opposition to the House move in a letter released by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a staunch opponent to breaking up the court.
"The reorganization of appellate circuits is a major policy initiative and would impact the system of justice for millions of Americans. The issue is squarely under the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee and any budgetary issues are merely incidental," Specter and Leahy wrote to the leaders of the Senate Budget Committee.
Supporters of breaking the circuit - who have been pushing for the split for years - say the nation's largest appeals court has gotten too big to be effective. The court is also the frequent source of rulings that irritate conservatives, like the 2002 opinion that declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional when recited in public schools.
The House measure would create a 9th Circuit covering California, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands, and a new 12th Circuit covering Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Arizona. It also would add new judgeships.
Feinstein has promised that if the circuit split measure comes to the Senate floor she'll block it with a procedural objection against allowing non-budgetary provisions in budget bills.
DiFi is up for re-election in '06, btw.
Specter is a sorry POS. I wish the old goat would go visit his great, great, great grandpa. LOL
So according to Spector, Leahy and Feinstein, the checks and balances of the Federal courts sit squarely with the Senate Judiciary Committee? I'm going to have to check the Consititution. Be back later.
(Editor's note: What follow is a statement issued by Sen. Arlen Specter on Thursday, Nov. 18 [2004]. Specter's potential chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary committee is strongly opposed by conservatives, and he has spent the past week seeking the support of his Republican colleagues.)
I have not and would not use a litmus test to deny confirmation to pro-life nominees.I have voted to confirm Chief Justice Rehnquist after he voted against Roe v. Wade. Similarly, I have voted to confirm pro-life nominees Justice Scalia, Justice O'Connor, Justice Kennedy. And I led the successful fight to confirm Justice Thomas, which almost cost me my Senate seat in 1992.
I have assured the president that I would give his nominees quick committee hearings and early committee votes so floor action could be promptly scheduled.
I have voted for all of President Bush's judicial nominees in committee and on the floor. And I have no reason to believe that I'll be unable to support any individual President Bush finds worthy of nomination.
I believe I can help the president get his nominees approved, just as I did on confirmation of two controversial Pennsylvania circuit court nominees, when other similarly situated circuit nominees were being filibustered.
I have already registered my opposition to the Democrats' filibusters with 17 floor statements and will use my best efforts to stop any future filibusters.
It is my hope and expectation that we can avoid future filibusters and judicial gridlock with a 55-to-45 Republican majority and election results demonstrating voter dissatisfaction with Democratic filibusters.
If a rule change is necessary to avoid filibusters, there are relevant recent precedents to secure rule changes with 51 votes.
I intend to consult with my colleagues on the committee's legislative agenda, including tort reform, and will have balanced hearings with all viewpoints represented.
I have long objected to the tactic used in bottling up civil rights legislation in the Judiciary Committee when it should have gone to the floor for an up-or-down vote. Accordingly, I would not support committee action to bottle up legislation or a constitutional amendment, even one which I personally opposed, reserving my own position for the floor.
I'm against the breakup, too. It is better to keep a cancer contained. Just leave that pack of sick clowns as one big circus so that the Supreme Court only has to deal with constantly reversing one court all the time instead of two.
Just working hard to institutionalize socialism as the way of life in America. Talk about trusting the hen house to the foxes...what a freakin' joke and a massive tragedy for America.
Washington is working hard to get Hillary elected!! All of them.
<< ...... the checks and balances of the Federal courts sit squarely with the Senate Judiciary Committee? I'm going to have to check the Consititution. Be back later. >>
Take a sleeping bag and provisions.
You'll be a while looking.
Arlen Spectre is nothing more than a Democrat masquerading as a Republican.
Specter.
Don't blame me, I volunteered for Toomey.
Specter OPENLY ADVOCATES punting of hot button social issues to the courts.
... you hear it said often, but frankly not too often, that short of a declaration of war, the most important function of the United States Senate is the confirmation of U.S. Supreme court justice for lifetime terms.They make the decision on the cutting edges of all of the big questions in our society.
As things have evolved, the Congress punts to the court, the executive branch punts to the court. And they have lifetime tenure and independence, and they have come somehow in our society to take on those cutting edge questions. So it is very, very important.
Transcript: Sen. Specter Discusses Alito Nomination | Oct 31, 2005
That sounds like my "Don't blame me, I voted for Rocky" line I always use.
Thanks for the info... and Happy 230th Birthday!
Semper fi.
Then, regardless of whether the Republicans held that seat in Pennsylvania, or lost it, at least Specter would not be infesting the Judiciary Committee, and posing a potential road block to every Administration action in the area of the courts and the constitution.
Specter has not only sold out to the unions in Pa., which is why he is so squishy on Republican issues, he is also rather stupid on the subject of constitutional analysis. He does not, for instance, understand the difference between Brown v. Board of Education and the case that it reversed, Plessy v. Ferguson.
Congressman Billybob
I just sish Satan would hurry up and collect the debt that Specter owes him.
Thank you Martin - how quickly everyone forgets (which is exactly what Snarlen Arlen is counting on).
That move has needed to happen politically for YEARS. Now it needs to happen if purely for the sake of administration.
Spectre is stabbing us in the back AGAIN.
Semper Fi and Happy Birthday as well, Marine.
I don't want some east coast idiots making decisions that impact of the lives of those of us who live under the 9th circus. It's become the laughing stock of the entire country.
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.