Free Republic

The Democratic filibuster against President Bush's judicial nominees continues. With the United States population sound asleep, Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) begins to read from Robert A. Caro's "Master of the Senate," a biography of Lyndon Baines Johnson. "It's 1,040 pages," he announces. "I assure you, I'm not going to read all thousand pages." By Friday morning, the debate was over. Democrats had won. Republicans had been unable to reach cloture. The Democratic filibusters against Charles Pickering, William H. Pryor Jr., Priscilla Owen, Miguel Estrada, Carolyn Kuhl and Janice Rogers Brown continued. President Bush's nominees remained stuck in the Senate. Senate...

<p>Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have worked in close concert with outside special-interest groups to defeat President Bush's judicial nominees, according to internal Democratic staff memos.</p> <p>In one memo to Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois obtained by The Washington Times, Washington lawyer Miguel A. Estrada is singled out as "especially dangerous" because "he is Latino." Mr. Estrada, born in Honduras, withdrew his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in September after being filibustered for eight months.</p>

Mark Jimenez gets 2 years for election fraud A U.S. federal court sentenced Thursday (Friday in Manila) ousted Manila congressman Mark Jimenez to more than two years in jail for federal election fraud. Jimenez was sentenced to 2 1/4 years in federal prison and ordered to pay $1.2 million restitution on his guilty plea to election conspiracy and tax evasion charges. He handed over a check for the first $400,000. The court ruled that Jimenez contributed illegally to the campaigns of then-president Clinton and other Democrats, including then-senator Robert Torricelli of New Jersey. He also became a confidante of...

This morning, we know for sure: the Senate Republicans are serious about President Bush’s judicial nominees. There had been some question. Up until 6 PM last night, all the Majority Leader Bill Frist and his staff had to offer was talk. We heard from the Senator’s senior advisor that Frist had an “itchy trigger finger” to get something done about the nominees being filibustered by his Democrat colleagues. Months ago, they told us to “get ready for hardball.” Even before that, it was “Anything is possible, nothing is off the table.” And so when Frist’s staff told us last week,...

For the last several months, liberals have entertained themselves by making a mockery of the federal judicial confirmation process. Anyone paying even a modicum of attention realizes that the fight over these nominations is based mainly (solely, one could argue) on the issue of abortion. The Left, including Senate Democrats and groups like NARAL, have treated nominees like Priscilla Owen, Carolyn Kuhl, Janice Rogers Brown, Bill Pryor, Charles Pickering, and Miguel Estrada with utter disdain. They have labeled these men and women as "extremists," "anti-woman," "radically right-wing," "far-right judicial activists," "virulently anti-choice," "out-of-the-mainstream judges," "conservative ideologues," "controversial," and "hostile." On...

Last week, Senate Democrats effectively defeated the nomination of Charles Pickering to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals through abuse of the filibuster. No doubt liberal ringleaders against the judge — Sens. Ted Kennedy (D., Mass.), Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), and Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) — were pleased to add another Bush nominee's scalp to their collection, but with Tuesday night's Republican victory in the Mississippi gubernatorial race, as well as vulnerable Senate seats across the south and midwest in 2004, it may be Pickering who ultimately has the last laugh.

Teddy Kennedy used to oppose delays of judicial nominations, especially of women and minorities -- at least he claimed to. SEN. KENNEDY: "When the Founders wrote the Constitution and gave the Senate the power of advice and consent on Presidential nominations, they never intended the Senate to work against the President. . ."------ Republicans have often, and rightfully, denounced the efforts of Leftists to prevent a number of President Bush's quality judicial nominees from being confirmed. By blocking votes and dragging the nominees through the mud to make them look as bad as possible, Senate Democrats have delayed and denied...

In the ongoing battle to nominate experienced, capable, and, dare we say, diverse candidates to the judiciary that will interpret the Constitution and not attempt to re-write it, the Bush administration and Republicans in the Senate have gone only half way to completing the process. Democrats led by Charles Schumer and Ted Kennedy blocked and filibustered the nomination of Miguel Estrada (an Hispanic American) over a 22 month span, to the point where he removed himself from the nomination. Now, a similar battle is looming for the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown (an African American). President Bush should be commended...

This is purely a vanity post but I'm relying on the wise ones here at Free Republic to help me out. Next sememster I will have to write a paper on some "Special Problem" in history. This paper will rely very heavily on primary source documents. One of the issue I am considering for the paper is the history of judicial appointments in the last 40 years. So my question is this: Where can I find original source documents on the confirmation of judicial nominees in the Senate since 1964? Is there an online resource for this information? I live...

Last month, Miguel Estrada, who had been nominated by the Bush administration over two years ago to fill a vacancy on the Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington DC, threw in the towel. He had had enough. His nomination had been blocked first by liberal democratic senators who controlled the Senate Judiciary Committee — and the confirmation process — throughout 2001 and 2002, and then finally by the same liberal coalition whose filibuster of his nomination throughout 2003 prevented the full Senate from voting on his nomination. Fed up, the conservative nominee withdrew his own nomination. Following the withdrawal, two...

In the latest issue of National Review (9/29/2003), on p.10 in the "The Week..." section, is the following (second bullet): "GOP Senators are often urged to make Democrats engage in an old-fashioned talk-all-night filibuster, but that's not possible under today's parliamentary rules (and with the GOP's one-seat majority)." I confess to being among the FReepers critical of how the Senate Republicans seemingly indifferently allowed the Estrada nomination to be run into the ground. But the item says the rules are changed from before. Would somebody knowledgeable about this please explain?

<p>Four years ago, then-Sen. John Ashcroft led the successful fight on the Senate floor to deny a federal judgeship to an impeccably qualified African-American nominee.</p> <p>He said his opposition to Missouri Supreme Court Justice Ronnie White was because the jurist was "pro-criminal," but Ashcroft knew he wasn't.</p>

A famous American once dreamed all men might someday be judged by their character, not by the color of their skin. In the case of federal appeals court nominee Miguel Estrada, it seems that Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream happened. But some Senate Republicans don't want to believe it. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia often decides cases dealing with the federal government's powers. So its decrees can ripple out, casting broad ramifications for all of America. Also, the court is often a steppingstone to the Supreme Court. Estrada, President Bush's appointee to this court,...

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Well, there goes one of my favorite jokes -- to wit, insisting that Miguel Estrada is actually Japanese. After waiting two and a half years for the Senate's Democrats to allow a vote on his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Estrada has decided to become rich. Rather than hear such paragons of balderdash as the Hon. Charles E. Schumer calumniate him as politically extreme, Estrada withdrew his name from the Senate's butcher block. Now, he will continue his extremely lucrative law practice at one of Washington's most prestigious law firms....

Washington -- After waiting two and a half years for the Senate's Democrats to allow a vote on his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Miguel Estrada has decided to become rich. Rather than hear such paragons of balderdash as the Hon. Charles E. Schumer calumniate him as politically extreme Estrada withdrew his name from the Senate's butcher block. Now he will continue his extremely lucrative law practice at one of Washington's most prestigious law firms. For over two years he has wondered if he would be able to afford a lovely country retreat...

A former presidential candidate says President Bush and the Republicans in the Senate should have done more to overcome the filibuster of federal appeals court nominee Miguel Estrada. When Estrada asked the president to withdraw his nomination, Bush and the Senate Republicans expressed outrage. But many conservatives say that is not good enough. According to Gary Bauer, chairman of the Campaign for Working Families, several things could have been done. "The president could make what's called recess appointments of these judges when Congress is out of session. He could address the American people and explain to them why these court...

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Last week, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) claimed a victory in the battle over President Bush's judicial nominees when Miguel Estrada asked that his name be withdrawn from consideration. The New York senator was emboldened by the event and said that the Democrats will continue to block judges who are "far beyond the mainstream and refuse to answer questions." Schumer used his membership on the Senate Judiciary Committee to block nominees when Democrats were in the majority in 2001 and has led unprecedented filibusters of lower court nominees since his party was relegated to the minority following...

I give the liberals in the Senate a lot of credit. They win first prize for the greatest amount of gall displayed in the 108th Congress. Following the withdrawal of Miguel Estrada as an appeals court nominee, liberals blamed the White House for his failure to be confirmed. They led the filibuster to block Estrada's elevation to the bench and so - according to their way of thinking - it is the fault of the White House that he withdrew. The justification for this absurdity is as follows: Estrada worked in the Justice Department. The liberals on the Judiciary Committee...

September 5, 2003, 1:00 p.m. By Robert Alt On Thursday, Miguel Estrada asked President Bush to withdraw his nomination as the first Hispanic on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Estrada's nomination had been held up for well over two years. Despite impeccable credentials and a bipartisan majority supporting his confirmation, 45 Democratic senators persisted in a filibuster through seven attempts at cloture. Given his record, why did these Democrats block Estrada's nomination? Put simply, because he is a Hispanic who broke from the party fold. Despite their inevitable protesting to the contrary, it is clear that Ted Kennedy's gang...

Liberals Claim Victory in Estrada Withdrawal By Jeff Gannon Talon News September 5, 2003 WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- On Thursday, President Bush's embattled nominee to the D.C. Circuit Court of the Appeals asked that his name be withdrawn. In a letter to the president, Miguel Estrada wrote, "I believe that the time has come to return my full attention to the practice of law and to regain the ability to make long-term plans for my family." Estrada's historic nomination would have made the Honduran immigrant the highest-ranking Hispanic in the Judiciary. His gracious exit did not close the door to...