Posted on 08/02/2007 5:56:40 PM PDT by LdSentinal
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) surprised both liberal and conservative activists Thursday by voting with Republicans on the Judiciary Committee to move a controversial conservative judicial nominee to the Senate floor.
Feinstein voted with nine Republicans to pass Leslie Southwick, President Bush’s nominee to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, despite the objections of Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and members of the Democratic leadership who sit on the panel. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), a member of the Democratic leadership team, both voted against Southwick.
Feinstein’s support for Southwick is surprising because she is one of a small group of Democrats who voted against both of Bush’s nominees to the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito.
But Feinstein and other Democrats have come under increasing pressure from Republicans in recent days to move Southwick.
On Wednesday, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) offered an amendment to children’s health insurance legislation on the Senate floor calling for a vote on the nomination.
Also this week, the leading Republican presidential candidates put out a cascade of statements on the growing Senate fight over Southwick, a maneuver designed to draw attention to the partisan divide over judges and excite conservatives on the campaign trail.
On Wednesday, former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) posted a harsh condemnation of Senate Democrats on his website, taking them to task for blocking the nomination.
By focusing on the fight over Southwick, Thompson and other GOP candidates have expanded the scope of the debate over conservative judges and put the issue at the forefront of the Republican primary. Until now, the skirmishing over Southwick had been confined to the Judiciary Committee hearing room and the few activists who follow closely the progress of Bush’s nominees.
“Sadly, Judge Southwick is the latest in a long line of nominees for that bench to be delayed,” Thompson wrote.
Also on Wednesday, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) sent a letter to Leahy exhorting him to move Southwick to the floor.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) also jumped into the fray by issuing statements on Southwick Thursday.
“The Democrats’ obstructionism is a disgrace and is an example of politics at its worst,” said Giuliani in a statement on Democratic opposition to Southwick. “Our courts should not be compromised because of partisans who are forgoing their Constitutional responsibilities in order to pursue a political agenda.”
Over the past several weeks, senior Republican members of the Senate Appropriations Committee have put pressure on Feinstein, a fellow appropriator, to reconsider Southwick’s nomination. Sen. Thad Cochran (Miss.), ranking Republican on Appropriations, asked Feinstein to meet with Southwick. Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee and a senior member of Appropriations, also pressed Feinstein.
Specter told The Hill last month that Feinstein was considering voting for Southwick, but last week Feinstein declined to talk about the nomination.
Liberal activists immediately condemned her vote.
“We are deeply disappointed that the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee and Senator Feinstein have advanced Leslie Southwick’s nomination to a powerful lifetime seat on the 5th Circuit,” said Ralph Neas, the president of People for the American Way, a liberal advocacy group that has consistently opposed Bush’s most conservative court picks.
“It is incomprehensible that someone with such a disturbing legal record is being pushed toward confirmation,” Neas said of Southwick. “That’s not what Americans voted for when they gave Democrats a majority in the Senate.”
Neas urged the full Senate to reject Southwick’s nomination. A floor vote is expected after the August recess.
Southwick is widely expected to have support from a majority of senators when he reaches the Senate floor. Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), a Democratic centrist, said yesterday that he would vote to confirm Southwick, giving the nominee crucial support in a chamber evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.
Democratic opponents could still defeat Southwick’s nomination by blocking it with extended debate. But such a filibuster could quickly swell into a high-profile fight energizing the Republican base and putting pressure on Democrats from conservative states.
Curt Levey, the executive director of Committee for Justice and a defender of Bush’s nominees, said he was surprised that Feinstein defected Thursday but said that he expected Democrats to back down on Southwick eventually because he said their objections are so unsubstantial.
“I thought that when we shined the light of day on this that the Democrats would not be willing to pay the price,” he said. “The presidential contenders raised the issue and Republicans crafted a Sense of the Senate Resolution [on Southwick’s nomination] and more and more senators were going to the floor on it.”
Senate Democrats have objected to Southwick because he joined two controversial opinions while serving on the Mississippi Court of Appeals.
In one case, Southwick joined a narrow majority to uphold the reinstatement of a white state employee who had lost his job for using a racial slur. In another, he joined a decision to award custody of an 8-year-old child to her father instead of her bisexual mother. The decision inflamed liberal activists for its pointed use of the word “homosexual” instead of “gay.”
I just sent her a fax thanking her for allowing the full Senate to vote and hoping that she will continue to support the nomination. It would be great to see this move forward!
Exactly...... that was my first thought, as well.
“Every now and then, Feinstein will exhibit some reason. She’s not as moonbatty as Boxer is.”
Especially if you illegally got your husband military contracts and the inquisition of the AG by the left isn’t panning out the way you expected it to.
It doesn't take much to get these people mad.
Truth to a liberal is like sunshine to a vampire.
To the gallows with him!
I think this was a move purely to avoid energizing the GOP base. It was possibly made in consultation with the Clintons. It also could have been that she was in fact chosen by the Dims in the Senate as the committee member who could most afford this vote.
Nice touch of you to do so.
I don’t know what has got into her lately, but one hopes that maybe she will be encouraged enough to actually seek even more praise from us.
She’s minding her P’s and Q’s in hopes of staying out of the pokey for enriching herself with military contracts.
She’s minding her P’s and Q’s in hopes of staying out of the pokey for enriching herself with military contracts.
Whatever her reason for this vote, it is a safe bet that it is self-serving. Principles didn’t come into it.
I suspect she’s trying not to get her house raided like Stevens, with FBI looking for stuff on the military construction contracts.
Wow, the queers and fagots homosexuals are real sensitive, aren't they.
Yes she does, and I emailed her, and thanked her :)
I am sorry to all Freepers, but this as close to what I would say as any candidate got.
Or promised her something.
Wow, this is a tough one. Not! Appropriations? Think about it. It's simple vote-trading, probably to funnel more federal money into her husband's CA businesses. At the extreme, maybe she's playing nice to avoid some awkward ethics quesions on the same subject.
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.