Posted on 05/03/2002 9:28:39 AM PDT by SunStar
Bush Declares Judiciary 'Crisis'
The Associated Press
Friday, May 3, 2002; 11:56 AM
WASHINGTON President Bush accused Senate Democrats on Friday of "endangering the administration of justice in America" by balking at many of his judicial nominees.
Declaring a vacancy crisis on the federal bench, Bush said, "Justice is at risk in America and the Senate must act for the good of the country."
The sharp challenge to the Democratic-controlled Senate reflected a mounting fight between the White House and Democrats over the shape of the federal judiciary. Democrats have objected to the nominees on many grounds, including their contention that Bush's candidates tend to be conservative.
The standoff is a warm-up for what both sides predict will be an enormous fight if Bush gets a chance to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.
Bush said he has nominated 100 candidates to the federal bench and the Senate has confirmed half. Only nine of his 30 nominees to federal appeals courts have been confirmed, Bush said. Of his first 11 nominees, announced a year ago, only three have been confirmed.
Bush said his nominees "are in the solid mainstream of American legal opinion."
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.
"By its inaction, the Senate is endangering the administration of justice in America," Bush said.
"I want you all to spread the word about how serious this vacancy crisis is," Bush told lawyers and law professors at the White House.
Fight fire with fire bump!
And for a day at least it forces the B___ and Moan Republicans to silently grumble and search for another topic to proclaim the end of the world.
"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."
Who wants to post the stats on this?
Yep uh huh. Let's see how the Dims spin this. Has Daschole been on yet?
He did not mention that the shortage is partially due to Republican senators who derailed many nominees of former Democratic President Clinton.
If it's true, it's fair enough. But I am going to want to see A WHOLE LOT MORE "did not mention" 's in future stories! Like these:
Dan
I think Bush just signaled that rather than attempting a legal way out of this logjam that he's putting his eggs in the election basket come November.
1. He could make recess apptmts.
2. He could ask for Supreme review of committee obstructionism of full Senate vote NEGATING a constitutional provision: separation of powers.
3. He could go after a constitutional amendment clarifying the REQUIREMENT for a full Senate vote.
4. He could wait for an election to change the balance of power in the Senate.
5. He could exert other type political power....tradeoffs, compromises, money,etc.
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
Nobody believes that. But, it will change the hearts and minds of the squishy middle, the undecided in the American electorate.
And the elections are only months away.
Democrats have objected to the nominees on many grounds, including their contention that Bush's candidates tend to be conservative.
Uh...
pro-2nd-ammendment & pro-life = conservative.
pro-gun-control & pro-choice = apolitical??
I'd like to know the answer to this, too. I recall reading, in an earlier discussion of this, that most of Clinton's judicial nominees were actually confirmed, even when there were serious reservations about some of them. Again, I don't have any facts at hand, unfortunately. Anybody else?
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.