Posted on 05/03/2002 8:59:44 AM PDT by Phlap
President Bush on Friday accused Senate Democrats of "endangering the administration of justice in America" by refusing to confirm many of his nominees for federal judgeships.
The Republican president and the Democratic-controlled Senate have been locked in an ideological dispute over Bush's judicial nominees, with Democrats accusing Bush of picking people who are too conservative.
"By its inaction the Senate is endangering the administration of justice in America," Bush said. "I call on Senate Democrats to end the vacancy crisis in our federal courts by restoring fairness to the judicial confirmation process."
In a speech, Bush said of 100 federal court nominees he has sent to Capitol Hill in the past year, only half have been confirmed. Only nine of his 30 nominees to federal circuit courts of appeal have been confirmed, he said.
"All across America the wait for justice is growing longer, the burden on federal judges is growing heavier and the frustration level of ordinary Americans seeking justice is growing greater," Bush said.
copyright reuters
Now, for two or three recess appointments to the Sixth Circuit. THAT is where the big emergency is, and it's the only place Bush can get away with recess appointments.
On another topic looks like Spurrier got Matthews for nothing.
As for the Matthews situation, it looks like the Redskins have a good QB for a couple of years. This will work as well as the release of Jim Harbaugh did.
Pickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: March 07, 2002;
Author: Jeff JohnsonMake them pay for 'Borking': David Limbaugh rebukes spineless Republicans to support Pickering
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 5, 2002;
Author: David LimbaughThe GOP's Post-Pickering Strategy
Source: National Review Online; Published: March 1, 2002;
Author: Byron YorkPickering Fight Shows Liberals At Their Worst
Source: Roll Call.com; Publblished: February 21, 2002;
Author: Mort KondrackeStill Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002;
Author: John NowackiDismantling Democracy through Judicial Activism
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 12, 2002;
Author:Tom Jipping'A Troubling Pattern': Ideology Over Truth In Judicial Confirmations
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 10, 2002;
Author: Paul E. ScatesDemocrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002;
Susan JonesThe Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002;
Author:Byron YorkSYMPOSIUM Q: Should the Senate Take Ideology into Account in Judicial Confirmations
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: February 4, 2002;
Authors:
Ralph G. Neas -- YES: The ideology of nominees for the federal judiciary matters more now than ever
Roger Pilon -- NO: Since judges apply law, not make it, the Senate's concern should be with judicial temperamentWhat is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002;
Author: Thomas L. JippingBlasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002;
Matt PyeattJudicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001
Author: Thomas L. JippingSenator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001
Author: By John NowackiSenator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001
Author: Rev. Louis P. SheldonA Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001
Author:EditorialSen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001
Author: Paul E. ScatesJudicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001
Author: Audrey HudsonPatrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001
Author: William A. MayerJudicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. JippingPartisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001
Author: John NowackiLeahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Author: John NowackiObedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001
Author: Thomas L. JippingWhy is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published:October 26, 2001
Author: Mary MostertPat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: John NowackiOperation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: T.L.JippingDaschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001
Author: Dave BoyerLeahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001
Author: Tom JippingDems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping</blockquote
"He said more than 10 percent of federal judgeships are vacant. He did not mention that the shortage is partially due to Republican senators who derailed many nominees of former Democratic President Clinton."
OK, who wants to put up the stats?
The people at Reuters are nothing but a bunch of idiots as far as I'm concerned.
Let's ROLL over the Democrat Jihad!
I could be wrong about this, but I believe that is why there have been no judiciary recess appointments.
While Bush can make recess appointments for executive branch positions, I don't know if it is legal for judicial appointments. The latter are for life, to avoid having to kow-tow to politicians (to remain unbiased and all that). If a sitting judge has to be re-confirmed it could affect his impartiality, knowing he has to kiss up to the congress critters again in 12 months.
I think the thing here is the ballot box in November where we replace those Demorats and RINO's on the judiciary commitee with those who will put those judges in. Right now, the reason for the mess is because of a certain POS from Vermont who switched parties and gave the Demorats an illegitimate majority in the Senate. Something I don't think the voters had in mind in the 2000 elections.
What the Demorats seem to want want is for their party to become the source of law in this country and for their platform to attain the full force of law. This is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they set up the framework for goverment in this country but apparently some people with a warped mindset seem to think differently.
Any recess appointment is valid only for the remainder of the existing Congressional term, unless confirmed by the Senate, after which they must step down. Thus at the end of this year any and all recess appts (judicial, executive, otherwise) would become void. They can be confirmed by the new Congress if renominated.
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.