Posted on 04/24/2005 6:18:06 PM PDT by quidnunc
Louisville, Ky. – A retired federal judge whose promotion to an appellate court was blocked by a Senate filibuster called the tactic unconstitutional and said it should be ended permanently if it is used again.
Charles Pickering of Mississippi made the comments in Louisville's Highview Baptist Church, a few hours before a rally was to start aimed at getting churchgoers to protest the filibuster of nominees for the federal judiciary.
"Justice Sunday," organized by the conservative Family Research Council, was scheduled to feature a videotaped speech by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist rallying churchgoers to protest the filibuster tactic.
Other conservatives are scheduled to speak at the church, including R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, and James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family.
It is slated to be simulcast on Christian television and radio, and to churches across the country.
Pickering said senators should eliminate the filibuster if it is used against one more judicial nominee.
"The constitutional solution is the only option if there is another filibuster of a judicial nominee," Pickering said. "Why shouldn't the Constitution be followed?"
Pickering, who has withdrawn his nomination to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, said the Constitution requires a simple majority to approve or reject a nominee. Because a filibuster requires 60 votes to overcome, he said it is an unconstitutional barrier.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at kentucky.com ...
hope he hits the talk shows.
"Democrats threatened a filibuster of Pickering's nomination, accusing him of supporting segregation as a young man, and promoting anti-abortion and anti-voting rights as a state lawmaker. Pickering has denied the allegations."
Ok. Let's all "filibuster" against Sen. Kennedy's re-election. After all, he stood by and let Maryjo Kapeckni (sp?) suffocate to death and had her body removed from the state before local law enforcement was informed.
You realize that we'll have to "retire" 50 or more republicans, don't you?
either that, or convince the country to move to the right, and the spineless GOP will follow.
On most of the hot-button, contentious social/cultural issues, the country is already to the right. Or I guess it'd be more accurate to say that the 'Right' is the mainstream on these issues.
Unfortunatley for the GOP, such issues are not vote-deciding issues in enough places to reach that 60 member plateau.
OK, you all "KNOW" we are losing this battle. But how then do you explain the following:
1) Leahy getting on the floor of the Senate for a 30-minute rant NOT about how important the filibuster is, but how awful it is to be called names (like anti-religious).
2) Joe Biden on the Sunday shows saying that the democrats could compromise and allow all but 2 of the judges to get votes - THIS IS MAJOR, because it shows the the democrats do NOT think these judges are so unqualified that it would be a travesty to appoint them, which shows that they really are doing this for politics
3) David Broder, somewhat liberal-centrist but democrat columnist, saying the democrats should allow votes on ALL nominees so they can preserve the filibuster for an important supreme court nominee
4) Rumblings that Reid is seeking a compromise as well.
If the Democrats thought that forcing the republicans to kill the filibuster was good politically, they wouldn't be backing down. Of course the news media calls this the democrats reaching out, but since it is the democrats that started filibustering, for them to now offer NOT to filibuster is something.
I'm not sure that giving up ANY nominees to stop the filibuster is a great idea, but surely if they can get them to confirm 5 our of ever 7 we can certainly find 7 more good conservatives for them to pick 5 from. Bad for the individuals who get rejected, but still good for the judicial system.
I don't think we should give up anything, but the point is that this shows something has changed in the past week or so. The Democrat senators sounded a lot more sure and smug last week. They sound worried now.
This is simply not true.
1841: The Senate conducted its first continuous filibuster on February 18, over the issue of dismissal of the printers of the Senate. The filibuster continued until March 11. The first extended filibuster, debating the establishment of a national bank, began on June 21 and lasted fourteen days.link
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.