Leahy’s Surprise Attack

National Review Online ^ | 10/9/02 | Byron York

[FreedomWarrior]

October 9, 2002 9:25 a.m.

Leahy’s Surprise Attack

Another Bush nominee is whacked by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Tuesday's meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee was supposed to be a routine affair — a brief consideration of some lower-court judges, a discussion of pending legislation, and a quick adjournment so senators could move on to their next appointments.

It didn't work out that way. Instead, the routine gave way to an impassioned argument that revealed a level of bitterness inside the committee that has not been seen in more than a decade. And that bitterness is not just the result of profound ideological disagreements. Now, it is personal.

The subject was the nomination of Dennis Shedd to a place on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Shedd is well known and respected inside the committee. He is a former top aide to Sen. Strom Thurmond and served as chief counsel of the committee in the 1980s. He has been a U.S. District Court judge in South Carolina for the last eleven years and was nominated by President Bush for an appeals-court seat on May 9, 2001. He received the American Bar Association's top rating, and had a hearing before the committee on June 27 of this year.

But the committee has not voted on Shedd's nomination, meaning it cannot go to the full Senate for a confirmation vote. Shedd had been scheduled for a vote on September 19, but Democrat Edward Kennedy, who opposes the nomination, asked that the vote be delayed — a standard procedure under the committee's rules. According to those rules, a nomination that has been placed on an agenda but then delayed will be taken up at the next business meeting.

That next meeting was Tuesday. Republicans were sure that Shedd would be on the agenda, but late Monday, they learned that committee chairman Patrick Leahy had removed Shedd's name from the list of nominations to be considered. Orrin Hatch, the committee's ranking Republican, was outraged. This is personal, Hatch said. Everyone knows Shedd, and knows that the committee usually shows some deference to former staff members. But in this case, Hatch charged, Democrats were attempting to "violate, ignore, and/or abuse this rule for the expediency of the desired outcome."

"I am struck by the irony," Hatch said at the meeting, "that several members of this committee who support the rule-breaking removal of the Shedd nomination talk a good game about the importance of judges following the law and not ignoring it when it would suit them to do so. Today we learn that such talk is just talk."

Even Thurmond, the terribly frail 99-year-old Republican who once chaired the committee and made Shedd its chief counsel, made an appearance at the meeting to express his anger. "In my 48 years in the United States Senate, I have never been treated in such a manner," Thurmond read from a prepared statement. "You assured me on numerous occasions that Judge Shedd would get a vote, and that is all that I have ever asked of you. I have waited patiently for over 17 months, and I have extended every courtesy to you."

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, several Republicans echoed Thurmond's charges and all but accused Leahy of lying to them. "I approached him several times" to talk about Shedd, said GOP senator Sam Brownback. "He assured me numerous times that he was going to see that this got through." Hatch also said Leahy had pledged a vote on Shedd. "He promised me," Hatch said. "He promised Senator Thurmond."

"This is all politics," Hatch said, "and it's rotten politics, at that."

It's not entirely clear why Leahy canceled the Shedd vote. It was widely believed inside the committee that at least one, and perhaps two or three, Democrats planned to vote for Shedd, which would easily send the nomination to the full Senate. But it is also true that in recent weeks civil-rights groups have ratcheted up their attacks on Shedd. On October 2, the Congressional Black Caucus sent a letter to Leahy repeating earlier charges that Shedd's record shows "a pattern of insensitivity toward the issues that most affect minorities." In July, NAACP delegates meeting at the group's convention in Houston voted to oppose Shedd's nomination. Shortly afterward, NAACP president Kwesi Mfume wrote Leahy a letter saying that "Judge Shedd's membership to [sic] the Fourth Circuit would further radicalize a court that has practiced judicial activism in a manner that hurts racial and ethnic minorities and disenfranchised Americans."

Now the Shedd nomination, after coming so close to a committee vote, appears to be in limbo. Late yesterday, Hatch, along with Thurmond and Iowa Republican Charles Grassley, sent a letter to Leahy invoking a rarely-used rule requesting a special meeting of the committee. If Leahy agrees, the meeting will be this week. But a meeting is just a meeting. Right now, there is no evidence that Leahy plans to allow Shedd to move forward.

[Saundra Duffy]

The democraps strike again.

[Wolfstar]

Sigh. It's not a question of "guts," but one of precedent and conducting the work of the senate with civility and fairness that kept raw, bitter partisanship unders some degree of control. There is a reason for old-fashioned "gentlemen's agreements." Republicans — and, quite frankly, most Democrats prior to the Bork nomination — worked within time-honored Senate precedent. The Democrats of today do not. To them, power is all. Republicans of today are like a disciplined boxer observing Marquis of Queensbury rules while fighting for their lives against the most vicious of street thugs. It isn't a lack of courage, but a lack of understanding of the enemy that is the problem for Republicans.

[Wolfstar]

Strom is quite the old warhorse, isn't he. He offers us a superb object lesson in not going quietly into that good night. God bless him, indeed.

[LaGrone]

The Republicans must confront these lies at every opportunity; in the committees, on the floor of the Senate, and in the press. War is war.

[El Gato]

Democrats were attempting to "violate, ignore, and/or abuse this rule for the expediency of the desired outcome."

Same old, same old. Democrat policritters don't believe in rules or laws, except as applied to thee and me, but not to them.

[pointsal]

The Repulsiv-cans that hold themselves out as leaders in the Senate don't have a set of balls among them. Lott is a smooth-haired twit and Hatch is equally worthless. Pretty much a bunch of damned weaklings, if you asked me.

[pray4liberty]

Tell me again why Trent Lott agreed to "share power" with these petty criminals?

Good question. Just imagining Trent Lott's insipid, smiling turncoat face makes me want to smash it. GRRRR.

When's he going to get it that Democrats simply cannot be trusted!

[pray4liberty]

It isn't a lack of courage, but a lack of understanding of the enemy that is the problem for Republicans.

Maybe it's time they started arming themselves with grenades.

[Torie]

But I keep being told that there is no difference between the parties; both are socialist. It is all so confusing.

[nonliberal]

I agree. The Pubbies are going to have to get a severe case of rectal/cranial inversion so that they can see things from the leftist point of view.

[Brytani]

You mean the democratic controlled Senate, led by the Democrat Daschle who lies every-time he opens his mouth, the same Democrat senator who lied about a quote never made by our President and who supports the Democrats running an ad showing our president throwing a senior citizen off a cliff?

Is this the Senate you say will slap Leahy?

[paltz]

LINCOLN CHAFFEE WILL JUMP SHIP IF THE SENATE RETURNS TO A 50/50 SHOWDOWN. WE HAVE TO WIN MORE THAN A FEW SENATE SEATS OVER TO AVOID THIS.