Posted on 06/08/2005 8:34:53 PM PDT by Pikamax
Pryor a shoo-in for appeals court
> By BILL RANKIN The Atlanta Journal-Constitution > Published on: 06/09/05
The bitter two-year fight over the nomination of William Pryor to the federal appeals court in Atlanta is about to end. In a 67-32 vote Wednesday, the U.S. Senate decided to cut off debate on President Bush's appointment of the former Alabama attorney general to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
A vote on his confirmation is expected today.
The Republican majority in the Senate virtually guarantees Pryor's appointment to the lifetime post. But until a recent compromise between Republicans and Democrats, that slim majority wasn't enough to overcome a filibuster so frustrating to Bush that he put Pryor on the Atlanta court with a divisive recess appointment in February 2004. His temporary appointment is set to expire at the end of the year.
Eleven Democrats, including the seven who helped broker a compromise over stalled judicial nominees, voted Wednesday to end debate, shutting down the filibuster. But opposition to Pryor remains strong — a reminder that the war over the judiciary could flare again, especially if Bush is called on to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
When did a 55 to 44-1 majority become "slim"?
After reading his testimony I'm all for him. The thing about Disney World made me more supportive of him, not less. The Southern Baptist Convention led a boycott of Disney for the very same reason he rescheduled... I'm sure the Dems aren't winning friends there.
"When did a 55 to 44-1 majority become "slim"?"
When it became convinient for the Democrats to call it "slim".
and I'm sure they'll call it a "commanding" majority when that suits their ends as well.
It's about time! Congratulations Judge Pryor!
After a few years on the bench, Pryor will end up another Souter. The Moore incident told me all I needed to know about his willingness to sell out what is right and good to serve political expedience.
Actually, it showed that he was capable of following the law rather than the passions of the crowd.
As someone whose been a political supporter of Pryor since he became Attorney General, I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree with you
Pryor is above anything else, a man committed to strict constructionism and state's rights especially.
And Roy Moore was violating the law, he was also insulting any Alabamian who was not Protestant, and well, Roy Moore was only doing it for political gain.
His testimony to the Judiciary Comte. was the most amazing thing I have seen in politics. He did not flinch, he was calm, and he spoke plainly his opinions. He said Roe Vs WAde was an abdomination and that the 2nd amendment means exactly what it says -----itis an individual right of the citzens and it SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Kennedy and Schumer were silent and taken aback for about 4 seconds and red faced.
He really said THAT about the 2nd Amendment to the Committee....without, patronizing them.....I'm gonna like this guy!
Ted Kennedy thought "Roe Vs Wade" were two options for leaving the scene of an accident.
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.