Miguel Estrada May be Next Victim Of Judiciary's 'Gang Of Ten'

CNSNews.com ^ | September 09, 2002 | Paul M. Weyrich

[Stand Watch Listen]

The Senate Judiciary Committee's "Gang of Ten" has killed another of President George W. Bush's nominees.

Priscilla Owen was, by any measure, extremely well qualified to be on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. But qualifications are of no interest to a Judiciary Committee dominated by special interests.

What a chance to embarrass the President! Priscilla Owen was Governor Bush's pick for the Texas Supreme Court. The chance to tube a well-qualified woman from the President's home state was too much for this
ideologically driven Committee to resist.

Now watch the Committee's "Gang of Ten" as it tubes an extremely well-qualified Hispanic.

On August 23rd the President said this to a group of new American citizens: "You know, education is the pathway to success, and there's just example after example of people who came here with nothing except a dream or a hope and love and got a good education and succeeded.

"That's what America is about. That's what I love about our country. That's the hope. That's what distinguishes us from many other countries, that we welcome people from all walks of life. We proudly call you an American. We don't say, show us your birth certificate, how you're born, where you're born; you're American and we love you for being in America. We welcomed you to this country.

"And, you know, I've got a shining example right there in Washington I want to share a story with you about, because it's....we've got a little problem up there with this particular fellow. His name is Miguel Estrada. He's a young guy. He came to our country as a teenager. He barely spoke English.

"He had trouble with the language, because he didn't spend any time learning the language. And he got here, and he worked hard, and as a result of a good brain, a brilliant mind, he now has argued 15 cases before the United States Supreme Court.

"I've named him to a high bench, but the Senate won't give him a hearing. Here's a kid who comes to our country, works hard, learns the language. He's a brilliant jurist. He can't even get a hearing. I nominated him over a year and a half ago. I want this man to serve as a bright example of what is possible in America. He'll be a great judge, and the Senate needs to act." (applause).

Well, it appears that the Senate Judiciary Committee will give Estrada a hearing, but he may well suffer the same fate as Priscilla Owen and an earlier nomination, Judge Charles Pickering.

The smear campaign against Estrada has already started. As was the case with Owen and Pickering, once the smear effort starts, the nominee never has the chance to answer the charges.

Estrada has the same problem as the president's other nominees. He believes that judges should interpret the law but should not make the law. He believes that the Constitution means what it says and what the Founding Fathers intended it to mean. He does not buy the nonsense that the Constitution is a living document subject to the political correctness of our time.

And the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn't want such nominees on the bench. The President has nominated over 120 candidates for federal judgeships. Only 73 have been confirmed and most of those are federal district court judges. It is with nominees to the appeals courts, which handle 80% of all cases that go to a higher court, where the Committee has been especially dilatory.

Even with all of the nominations the president has made, there are still 30 vacancies in the courts for which there are yet no nominees. Despite this, the Judiciary Committee won't even hold hearings on most of the nominees the president has submitted.

What has happened in this Committee (one of only three which Majority Leader Tom Daschle has permitted to function because they do as he wishes) demonstrates the power of a single vote.

Often voters I speak with tell me they no longer participate in the process because their vote doesn't count. I don't know how anyone can say that when it comes to the U.S. Senate.

A single vote constitutes the majority and that majority not only has refused to confirm most of the president's judicial nominees, but also has refused to act on some 100 bills passed by the House. They include everything from the energy bill to the measure banning cloning.

If one vote can do this much damage, one vote can also undo the damage. That is something for those who don't want to vote to think about.

(Paul M. Weyrich is President of the Free Congress Foundation.)

Free Congress Foundation

[Stand Watch Listen]

Related Articles:

Toward Priscilla Owen, Not Even The Pretense Of Fairness
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: August 01, 2002;
Author: John Nowacki

The Owen Nomination: Liberals Don't Let Truth Stand In Their Way
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: July 18, 2002;
Author: John Nowacki

Democrats Hold Judicial Nominations for 406 Days and Counting
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: June 21, 2002;
Author: Christine Hall

Judge The Senate Judiciary Committee Not By What It Says, But What It Has Done
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: | June 06, 2002;
Author: John Nowacki

The Left Keeps Trying -- And Failing -- To Smear Brooks Smith
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: May 16, 2002;
Author: John Nowacki

Pickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: March 07, 2002;
Author: Jeff Johnson

Make them pay for 'Borking': David Limbaugh rebukes spineless Republicans to support Pickering
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 5, 2002;
Author: David Limbaugh

The GOP's Post-Pickering Strategy
Source: National Review Online; Published: March 1, 2002;
Author: Byron York

Pickering Fight Shows Liberals At Their Worst
Source: Roll Call.com; Publblished: February 21, 2002;
Author: Mort Kondracke

Still Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002;
Author: John Nowacki

Dismantling 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. Scates

Democrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002;
Susan Jones

The Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002;
Author:Byron York

SYMPOSIUM 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 temperament

What is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Blasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002;
Matt Pyeatt

Judicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Senator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001
Author: By John Nowacki

Senator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001
Author: Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

A Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001

Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001
Author:Editorial

Sen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001
Author: Paul E. Scates

Judicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001
Author: Audrey Hudson

Patrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001
Author: William A. Mayer

Judicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001

Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001

Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Partisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001
Author: John Nowacki

Leahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Author: John Nowacki

Obedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Why is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published:October 26, 2001
Author: Mary Mostert

Pat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: John Nowacki

Operation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: T.L.Jipping

Daschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001
Author: Dave Boyer

Leahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001

Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001
Author: Tom Jipping

Dems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

[3AngelaD]

We can only hope that Senators Hatch and Lott have their ducks lined up so they can hold some immediate confirmation hearing/votes the minute we take back the Senate, which with any luck will be in early November. But I doubt it. Hatch has become one of those guys who thinks it's more important to be "liked" by his Democratic colleagues than to achieve our conservative, Republican goals. And he's too busy writing music, for pete's sake.

The current judicial nominations situation a disgrace. Leahy is a disgusting traitor. Ditto the drunken, bloated murderer of young women.

[Gritty]

We really can't expect criminals to vote for the confirmation of honest judges, can we?

[The Vast Right Wing]

Bush needs to go Nuclear for this guy. Bush needs to trot out the old race-card and do anything else for this guy. His story is that of the American dream. He came here as a young boy from Latin America, taught himself english, went to Harvard, and is now considered one of the most well respected judicial minds in the nation. He certainly will be nominated to the Supreme Court if he makes it to the appellate level. Why do democrats demonize minorities and women that are conservative? What ever happend to diversity? Bush needs to really, really fight for this one. Doing so will cause immense damage to the image of the liberals.

[xsmommy]

ping

[okie01]

"Bush needs to really, really fight for this one. Doing so will cause immense damage to the image of the liberals."

The Hispanic vote awaits...

[hobbes1]

If he sends him up before election time, expect him to go the way of Owens. And expect to have the Senate Returend to the Republicans, and expect Owens Pickering and Estrada to be Resubmitted, and maybe even Justice Bork if someone steps down from SCOTUS for good measure ( I would .....)

The President has been good politically, but they need to play some Thumb-in-the-Eye politics to protect themselves when they are out of Power.

realistically, they should also be pointing out that the Dems Bare majority isn't a Legal one as the Widda Carnahan could have had her election nullified by the Republican Senate, legally, but they didn't play hardball. See what It got them.Lee Atwater should be tossing down Lightning bolts from above.

[lasereye]

The Dems are handing Bush and the Republican party a golden opportunity on this with Hispanic voters. I imagine they'll do what they usually do with golden opportunities. The GOP is like the defensive back who has the ball thrown directly into his hands with nothing between him and the goal line and drops it.

[PogySailor]

IIRC, Estrada was nominated in the FIRST GROUP over a 1 1/2 years ago. Daschle/Leahy have simply refused to schedule a hearing.

[hobbes1]

yup

[Coop]

If he sends him up before election time, expect him to go the way of Owens.

Estrada was submitted long ago. The Vindictive Committee has refused to vote on him.

Quite frankly, I'd be shocked if the Dems allowed a vote on Estrada before the elections. They could seriously hurt their stock with Hispanic voters throughout the nation.

[hobbes1]

We are talking about getting up a hearing, we know he is submitted see above.

[hobbes1]

they can hurt themselves almost as much by denying him the hearing he has a right to, if the morons supporting him would frame it tht way.

[Coop]

We are talking about getting up a hearing, we know he is submitted see above.

Well, that's not how it came across, based on this comment of yours.

If he sends him up before election time, expect him to go the way of Owens.

Obviously you intended the "he" to mean Dasshole or Leaky, but it came right after a discussion about President Bush.

[Political Junkie Too]

It would be another brick in the Democrat obstructionist wall. Bush should make this a campaign issue for November. Blocking Owen. Blocking Pickering. Blocking Homeland Security. Blocking the war on terrorism. Blocking the Pledge Of Allegiance. And now blocking Estrada.

Bush should ask, "Do we want this to continue forever?

-PJ