Clarence Thomas, 1991.
John Ashcroft, 2001.
Thomas Pickering, 2002
Miguel Estrada, 2003
The next Supreme Court nominee, 200?
Posted on 02/13/2003 11:51:59 AM PST by kattracks
Last night, Sen. Orrin Hatch, with over a quarter-century experience on the Senate Judiciary Committee, ripped into the Democrats for filibustering to block a vote on President Bush's judicial nominee to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in D.C., Miguel Estrada.
First, Hatch fired this salvo at Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, who accused President Bush of acting like a child on a playground: "I have been listening to this day after day after day. It is clear this is a game. It is a bad game. If they don't like the answers Mr. Estrada has given, vote against him. That is the remedy here. Don't filibuster. Vote against him. Talk against him, like we have had plenty of. Then you have an absolute right to vote against him if you want to."
He also said that blocking Estrada's nomination smacked of racism. Hatch snapped, "It is hypocritical. It is wrong. It is unfair. It is establishing a precedent that could hurt this country immeasurably. ... To do it against the first Hispanic nominated to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is particularly reprehensible, especially since he has every qualification a person needs to fulfill this responsibility. How far do we go with these ridiculous arguments, these unfair arguments, these discriminatory and prejudicial arguments, against a person who has every qualification to be on this court?"
Where the Democratic petition to the solicitor general is concerned, the senator from Utah accused the Democrats of stalling the nomination with frivolous paperwork. (The Democrats were arguing that Estrada had not answered their questions at the Democrat-controlled hearing, so they now need his confidential papers from his time at the solicitor general's office to find out what his opinions are on various subjects.)
Hatch remarked caustically: "Some of the arguments we have had around here are ridiculous. ... I have seen some unfair things here from time to time ... but I have never seen anything more unfair than what is happening here, with senators hiding behind this, I think, phony request for documents. They know they should not have a right to ... documents of recommendations of employees in the solicitor general's office concerning appeals ... and briefs. This is one of the phoniest excuses I have ever heard. Keep in mind, four of their former solicitors general, Democrat solicitors general, are on Miguel Estrada's side. And three of them reviewed every one of those documents. That is not good enough for them??
Hatch ripped the request for Estrada's papers further, accusing the Democrats of having prejudicial double standards: "This is one of the worst arguments I have ever heard on the floor of the Senate. And it is all done for political purposes," he said, because Estrada is a Republican, "which is very tough for them [the Democrats] to take."
He added, "There is nothing more than prejudice going on here; nothing more than unfairness going on here; nothing more than a double standard going on here; nothing more than trying to trip up the president of the United States and make his life even more miserable than it is every day with North Korea, with Iraq, with all the other problems we have in this world."
He did not stop there: "What gets me is we are in the middle of a filibuster of a federal judge, when the Constitution says we should give advice and consent, not advice and obstruction, not advice and a filibuster, not advice and unfairness.
"I have to admit there were some on our side who treated President Clinton in a shabby fashion. [But] I will tell you one thing: We never, ever filibustered a Clinton nominee, not once."
Hatch even pleaded with his compatriots on the other side of the aisle: "I have to say I care a great deal for all of my colleagues in this body. These are 100 of the greatest people on Earth. I care for my colleagues on the Democratic side. But where are they? Why aren't they telling us why? Why don't they give us a reason that is a good reason for being against Miguel Estrada, with all of the qualifications he has? Why couldn't they treat us the way they wanted us to treat their circuit court nominees, which I made sure we treated right? Why can't they be decent to this Hispanic nominee, the first ever nominated to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, one of the most important courts?"
The Judiciary Committee chairman then floated these questions, which are the subject of many talk shows around the country: "Why is it that senators from the Democrat side get on the floor and act as if, because a person is conservative, that person is not going to do what is right under the law; that person is not going to make sure the law is fulfilled; that person is not going to make sure the principle of stare decisis or prior precedent is followed? Why is it they think only liberal ideas are any good?"
Indeed, why?
In summation, he had this to say to his colleagues: "I have been on the Judiciary Committee ... 27 years now. There are very few who you would rate at the level with Miguel Estrada. Every Hispanic in this country ought to be proud of it. I am calling on every Hispanic in the country, whether Democrat, Independent, Republican, whether you are liberal, moderate or conservative, you better start calling the Democrats and let them know this is not fair, this is not right. It is abysmal. Some would say abominable."
Indeed, it is.
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
DNC
Wrong. It is mouth-breathing, spittle-spraying, cross-burning, whip-cracking, lynch-mobbing racism. They'd love him dearly if only he knew his place on their bread line.
Rush seemed surprised he got 3 "over the transom", irate Hispanic callers, and he said if this is an indication of what's going on out there, Democrats will pay dearly for this miscalculation. One caller equated this action by Democrats to the Bay of Pigs and Elian.
If "Miss Ruth" doesn't satisfy your criteria --- no one would....
Semper Fi
The networks need to. They continue to embrace the libs at their peril and FNC's gain.
They blindly are brainlessly follow their ego drive leadership down the road to complete ruin.
"I have to admit there were some on our side who treated President Clinton in a shabby fashion. [But] I will tell you one thing: We never, ever filibustered a Clinton nominee, not once."
That's accurate; because they blue-slipped 'em. They never even let many nominations come up for consideration by the Judiciary Committee.
he Senate, The Courts and the Blue Slip: The Ground Rules During the 1990s
"During the Clinton administration, the White House made significant efforts to consult with senators of both parties prior to nominating judges. With respect to nominees for federal district courts, senators or other elected officials submitted specific recommendations to the White House. In some states represented by both a Democratic and Republican senator, the two senators agreed to divide responsibility for suggesting nominees. In other instances, the Clinton administration received feedback and suggestions directly from Republican and Democratic senators. For example, Senators Orrin Hatch and Trent Lott each suggested candidates for district court seats in their home states; Hatch pushed strongly for the nomination of Ted Stewart in Utah, and Lott recommended Allen Pepper in Mississippi. Despite concerns expressed by civil rights and environmental groups, both Stewart and Pepper were nominated by President Clinton and quickly confirmed.
Genuine consultation also took place on appeals court nominations. Proposed Clinton administration selections were routinely discussed with senators of both parties, and nominations were sometimes delayed for several months as a result. Press reports indicated that President Clinton consulted with Senator Orrin Hatch, both before and after he assumed control of the Senate Judiciary Committee, prior to the Supreme Court nominations of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. In at least one instance, President Clinton nominated an appellate court judge recommended by a Republican Senator, despite objections from progressive groups. This occurred in 1999 when President Clinton accepted the recommendation of Senator Slade Gorton and nominated Barbara Durham for a seat on the Ninth Circuit, although health reasons later led to the nomination's withdrawal.
Senate Republicans also had significant influence after Clinton judicial nominees were selected. However, like other Congressional procedures, the blue slip policy can be-and has been-misused. After he assumed control of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the mid-1990s, Senator Hatch began to rigorously enforce a blue slip policy under which nominations could not move forward without the consent of both home state Senators. In 1998, this policy was made explicit on the blue slips themselves, which stated that "[n]o further proceedings on this nominee will be scheduled until both blue slips have been returned by the nominee's home state senators." Suddenly, a policy that had helped to force consultation and consensus was transformed into a vehicle for partisan obstruction.
Specific information on whether and when Senators returned blue slips is not made public. Nevertheless, it is clear that the strict blue slip policy effectively stopped any and all action on a number of Clinton nominees. For example, President Clinton nominated Helene White from Michigan for a seat on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on January 7, 1997. Then-Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan reportedly failed to return his blue slip for more than three years. During that time, the Judiciary Committee took no action whatsoever on the nomination. By the time Abraham was finally pressured to return the blue slip late in 2000, Hatch had indicated that no further action would be taken on appeals court nominees that year. President Clinton renominated White in 2001, but President Bush withdrew the nomination in March without any action by the Senate. As a result, the Hatch-led Judiciary Committee took no action on the White nomination, not even scheduling a hearing, for more than four years.
Senator Jesse Helms used his blue slip to block any action on all African-American nominees to the Fourth Circuit for more than four years. No African-American has ever been confirmed for a seat on the Fourth Circuit court of appeals, which covers North and South Carolina and several other southern states. Starting in 1995, President Clinton submitted several African-American nominees to that court from North Carolina, including James Beaty and James Wynn. Reportedly as a result of Helms' failure to return either of his blue slips, however, neither of these nominees even received a hearing from the Judiciary Committee. Not until President Clinton's 2000 recess appointment of Roger Gregory, whose nomination also failed to receive a hearing, has an African-American ever served on the Fourth Circuit.
Other Clinton appeals court nominees, mostly women or minorities, were reportedly blocked by home state Republican senators withholding their blue slips. Examples included: Jorge Rangel and Enrique Moreno of Texas, and Kathleen McCree Lewis of Michigan. Other appeals court nominees, such as Barry Goode of California, Elena Kagan of D.C., and Allen Snyder of Maryland, were blocked even when there was no home state Republican senator to object. Overall, although not a single Clinton-nominated appeals judge was voted down by the Senate, blue slip and related delays and blockades meant that the Senate approved only 61% of President Clinton's appellate court nominees, compared with 87% of those nominated by President Reagan. In 1999-2000, 19 out of 32 Clinton appeals court nominees - roughly 60% - were blocked from receiving a vote."
And Pickering, Owen, etc.
Did you listen to Rush today? Hispanics calling in left and right. The call screener said they were inundated with calls from Hispanics about Estrada. I heard 4 of them, and they were not happy. They were dims that, overnight, turned into Republicans! LOL
Keep it up, dims! Yer killin' yerselves!
Aaaaaand that would be the difference between them and you, Orin.
He is too stupid to understand the significance of his own words. As Rush says over and over to anybody who will listen: you cannot deal with these people. You must defeat them.
Welcome to FR! This is your first day, huh? Always nice to see folks joining the conservative cause. (sic!)
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.