The Right Would Filibuster Too...Right?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Gem, May 20, 2005.

  1. Gem
    Offline

    Gem BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    2,080
    Thanks Received:
    782
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +782
    This is a great piece....it plays "WHAT IF." What if we had a Democrat President nominated a judge who held views that by most peoples standards would be considered extemely far-left...the Republicans, now in the position the Democrats presently find themselves in, would filibuster like mad....right? They would stand up and read the phone book if that is what it took to keep such an extremist away from such a position of power over this nation....right? I mean, thats what the Democrats have been saying would happen if the situation was reversed...right?


    http://www.nationalreview.com/benchmemos/063778.asp
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. nakedemperor
    Offline

    nakedemperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +150
    Republicans certainly filibuster.. here's a list of some recent Republican filibusters of nominees reported to the floor...

    Richard Paez, 9th Circuit (2000)
    Marsha berzon 9th circiut (2000)
    Lee Sarokin, 3rd Circuit (1994)
    Rosemary Barkett 11th Circuit (1994)

    that said, filibuster doesn't make much sense to me.
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    This is different than what I've heard and read. So I thought I'd google down. Here's the first one:

    Paez:

    http://www.law.com/regionals/ca/judges/9circuit/paez.htm

     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Berzon:

    After wading through a couple pages from dem. underground and moveon, found this:

    http://www.nwherald.com/print/283220052998861.php

     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770

    Sarokin:

    (lucky me, found this on another mb:
    http://mediamatters.org/items/200503160004

    In addition to the approximately 60 judicial nominees that the Republican-led Senate blocked without resorting to a filibuster, several Republican senators, including current Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), unsuccessfully attempted to filibuster other Clinton judicial nominees. The Los Angeles Times reported on November 13, 2003: "As recently as March 2000, several Republicans voted to filibuster two Californians whom President Clinton had named to the 9th Circuit appellate court: Richard A. Paez and Marsha L. Berzon. ... Ultimately, the Republican stalling tactics failed, and both jurists now sit on the appellate court." The Washington Post documented a third attempted filibuster of a Clinton judicial nominee on October 5, 1994: The Senate "voted 85 to 12 to cut off a filibuster against confirmation of U.S. District Judge H. Lee Sarokin as a member of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. But Republicans continued to talk into the evening against Sarokin, whom they condemned as a 'liberal' and 'judicial activist.' "

    As you can see the Senate wasn't having any part of the fillibuster being extended to judicial nominations in 94. There never was a filibuster of a Dem candidate for the bench. To use one of Rufs (or one that he would use) analogies, It's like robbery, there's attempted robbery and then there's robbery.
     
  6. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    And Barker, well actually all of them:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/cornyn200311131044.asp

     
  7. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    excellent posts Kathianne

    i particularly enjoyed this quote:

    Jon Corzine, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, acknowledged — actually, he boasted — that the current blockade of judicial nominees is "unprecedented."
     
  8. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Thanks Manu.

    Lookie what Ann Althouse, (law prof) has up:

    http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/05/how-about-supermajority-to-reject.html

    Seems a search of original constitutional convention notes gives proof that the framers considered a supermajority to REJECT judicial nominees. Interesting indeed. I've given 2 links within the post, there are more:


     

Share This Page