Posted on 02/28/2003 5:17:10 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen
The Democratic filibuster against judicial nominee Miguel Estrada has little to do with the 41-year-old Honduran immigrant. It is part of a grand design to talk to death a succession of conservative judges selected by President Bush.
Democrats are intent on keeping the Senate from voting on any appellate nominations that do not meet the party's specifications.
This extraordinary design, without precedent in two centuries of judicial nominations, was launched Jan. 30 in the office of Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle. Present were Assistant Leader Harry Reid and six Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats. With all pledged to secrecy, the fateful decision was made to filibuster Estrada's nomination.
That was only the beginning. One Judiciary Committee member there was Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Senate's 71-year-old liberal lion. In private conversations with Daschle and in Democratic caucuses, Kennedy has pressed a plan to prevent President Bush from putting his ideological stamp on the federal bench. As Republicans returned this week from recess, they had no immediate response to this threat.
Internal Senate sources depict a Senate minority on an audacious mission. Rare use of the filibuster to keep a judicial nominee off the bench is only the tip of the iceberg. Multiple filibusters would generate the first full-scale effort in American history to prevent a president from picking the federal judges he wants.
At the Jan. 30 meeting in Daschle's office, the eight senators agreeing to filibuster the Estrada nomination did not discuss his merits or demerits as a nominee for the District of Columbia appeals court, second in importance only to the U.S. Supreme Court. Rather, the objections to Estrada were political and procedural.
His confirmation, they agreed, would set a precedent that appellate nominees need not answer detailed questions and would make it hard to stop him as a possible future Supreme Court nominee. The senators talked about slowing down a Bush "assembly line" of conservative nominees and cited support from an energized Democratic base.
Considering these politicized views, what Kennedy said when he took the Senate floor five days later sounds disingenuous. Demand for Estrada's memos as a government lawyer, Kennedy said, "would be helpful in understanding Mr. Estrada's fitness for a judgeship"-as if he had not decided to talk the nomination to death.
Off the Senate floor, Kennedy was more candid. According to Senate sources, he urged Daschle to devise a long-term strategy: to make a short list of judicial nominees that the Democrats would keep from ever coming to a vote. Privately, Kennedy talks frankly of a filibuster strategy.
While conceding that Estrada is "intelligent," Kennedy has told colleagues that he must be filibustered because of the need to win an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with the White House. Kennedy tells his younger associates that Bush's application of an ideological litmus test constitutes the "worst" judicial nomination process he has seen in 40 years of service. He accuses the president of daring Senate Democrats to keep ideologues off the court and refers to Estrada as a "stealth right-wing zealot." Such comments belie the notion that Bush's nominees would be given a Senate vote if only they would answer some questions.
Such an intractable position raises the question of how Democrats would expect to get any judges confirmed in the event that Bush is defeated for re-election but the Senate remains Republican in the 2004 voting.
The Republican Judiciary Committee chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, is outraged by the Democratic strategy and ready to respond in kind. But Hatch will not be chairman in 2005, thanks to Republican term limits. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, next in GOP seniority, as chairman might stop the cycle of vengeance.
That's what worries Republican strategists, who talk about jumping conservative Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona above Specter to guarantee a strong hand in the confirmation wars.
Well in advance, there is consideration of blocking a vote on future judicial nominees by a Democratic president until the Republican nominees who had been blocked by filibuster are confirmed. That is the morass into which the Senate is being led by Teddy Kennedy, its second most senior member.
Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Linda Chavez: Republicans Need To Call Dems' Bluff On Estrada Nomination
Source: CNSNES.com; Published: February 26, 2003; Author Linda ChavezSenate Democrats Can't Get Their Facts Straight
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: February 14, 2003; Author: John NowackiLeahy’s Surprise Attack
Source: National Review Online; Published: October 9, 2002; Author: Byron YorkShedded by Judiciary: Senate Democrats cast off another appointee
Source: Wall St Journal; Published: October 9, 2002Miguel Estrada May be Next Victim Of Judiciary's 'Gang Of Ten'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: September 09, 2002; Author: Paul M. WeyrichToward Priscilla Owen, Not Even The Pretense Of Fairness
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: August 01, 2002; Author: John NowackiThe Owen Nomination: Liberals Don't Let Truth Stand In Their Way
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: July 18, 2002; Author: John NowackiDemocrats Hold Judicial Nominations for 406 Days and Counting
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: June 21, 2002; Author: Christine HallJudge The Senate Judiciary Committee Not By What It Says, But What It Has Done
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: | June 06, 2002; Author: John NowackiThe Left Keeps Trying -- And Failing -- To Smear Brooks Smith
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: May 16, 2002; Author: John NowackiPickering 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
Obedient 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
And judging from that photo, what he doesn't have is any shame, vanity, and culinary self-control.
I'd say that, politically, Kennedy is right--if they can hold together a fillibuster on all judical nominees and the Republicans blink there will be big trouble in the Republican Party.But if the Republicans do NOT blink, the Democratic Party will be in even worse shape. Keep running those Spanish-language commercials against the anti-Estrada fillibuster! The Democrats must be forced to keep it up long enough to evicerate their reputation among hispanics.
Dems want to screw the process? Goes both ways.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may hapen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.. . . so it wouldn't work very well (I had some similar thoughts myself, and was corrected by FR's expertise net).
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.
