Posted on 09/04/2003 2:12:17 PM PDT by PhiKapMom
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
September 4, 2003
President's Statement on Miguel Estrada
Statement by the President
It is with regret that, at the request of Miguel Estrada, I have today withdrawn his nomination to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. I understand and respect his decision, and wish Mr. Estrada and his family the best.
Mr. Estrada received disgraceful treatment at the hands of 45 United States Senators during the more than two years his nomination was pending. Despite his superb qualifications and the wide bipartisan support for his nomination, these Democrat Senators repeatedly blocked an up-or-down vote that would have led to Mr. Estrada's confirmation. The treatment of this fine man is an unfortunate chapter in the Senate's history.
And you please be more careful when you try to compare apples to oranges(i.e Fortas versus Estrada).
Fortas was filibusterd. I don't know why. But I do agree with your persistent statement that the DEM Senators have precipated a hiterhto unprecidented event.
You get the last word.
Fortas was filabustered(by democrats by the way) for becoming Chief Justice of the Supreme Court due to well documented unethical behavior, he was already on the court, and got his vote on the Senate floor when his nomination for his intial seat on SCOTUS. He probably would have been impeached if Johnson hadn't withdrew his nomination and his subsequent resignation.
Nothing of the kind happened with Estrada. His nomination was filabustered for purely partisan reasons.
That's the difference. The Senate demos basically impeached him without any credible evidence. And that is the travesty.
Lessons of the Estrada Defeat
Legal Theory Blog ^ | September 4, 2003 | Prof. Lawrence Solum
Posted on 09/04/2003 5:47 PM CDT by pogo101
Withdrawal: What Does Estrada's Decision Mean?
NOMINEE NIGHTMARE
A Wake-Up Call
We failed Miguel Estrada and allowed Senate Democrats to erect a glass ceiling.
BY VIRGINIA THOMAS
Friday, September 5, 2003 12:01 a.m.
Not only is this a sad day for Miguel and Laurie Estrada, but we have all let something unfortunate occur in Washington. We allowed the U.S. Senate to erect a "glass ceiling" in our courts--you can do all the right things in America, but if you do not agree with Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton, you need not apply as a federal judge. This is the message that Democrats hope minorities, in particular, get from their victory as they succeeded in repelling a talented man, who happens to be Hispanic, from public service. For the hard left, Miguel Estrada was not qualified to be a federal judge because he would not march to their drumbeat.
A familiar stench is coming from the liberals in the Senate when it comes to judicial confirmation battles. A process that only a few years ago used any charge--true or untrue--to take down an ideological opponent or nominee now needs no such proxy. Instead, U.S. senators, who happen to be Democrats, audaciously mimic the rhetoric of far left groups by claiming that "ideology can be a disqualifier" from public service. Theirs is a strict orthodoxy that doesn't tolerate dissent, especially from minorities. Law is rarely ideological. Concern for the rule of law, victims' rights, due process, privacy, freedom of religion or even statutory construction is overruled by their orthodoxy.
At my husband's side through his Supreme Court confirmation ordeal, I know the personal toll and pain of these tactics. Being a nominee means putting one's life on hold. The process is all consuming, even though those in decision-making offices seem nonplussed. It becomes a life that is Kafka-esque. Miguel Estrada is not alone and he didn't get to this point in his career because you and I were exercising our political rights. He is at this point because we were too silent. We let others dominate Washington while we were taking our kids to school, going on summer vacations, playing sports or working out. A new barrier has been erected by the Senate Democrats and we let it happen.
Miguel's decision to withdraw his nomination should be a wake-up call for each and every one of us.
---snip---
Whether we are on the right or left, whether we are political or nonpolitical, each of us is partly responsible for Miguel's decision to withdraw his nomination. What did you and I do to discourage an honorable man who is mainstream and qualified from serving his country? It's not enough to look the other way as the left makes charges that go unanswered. Miguel Estrada is no extremist. It is the left that wants to capture the federal judiciary, as it claims is the goal of the right. I've seen this before--when those on the left accuse you of something they are guilty of themselves.
As I wrote previously on March 14, 2002, in this very space, the battle is whether there will be an independent judiciary or a liberal litmus test to transform our courts into another political branch. Miguel Estrada said yes to public service for 29 months; what did we do in that same time frame and what can we do now to help good people serve?
Mrs. Thomas is the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
Exactly! The worst thing we can do is give the DemocRATs the idea that their tactics are going to split Republicans and make some threaten to stay home in disgust! Those threats are childish -- wouldn't put up with that from my three kids and no longer going to let the "I am going to take my ball and go home crowd" get a free pass on here without comment either.
You think that might sadden little Tommy? ... hehe!
For the 1,427th time, this is a non-starter.
No, they are not.
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.