January 20, 2005

To Filibuster or Not? To Go "Nuclear" or Not?

This article on Law.com does an excellent job of explaining what's going on with the appelate judicial nominees that the Senate refused to approve in the last Congress (or the ones out of that set that the president has resubmitted for confirmation). The Democrats look unwilling to waver on their opposition to most of them, but there are a few cases in which an accomodation may be reached. The article discusses how that could potentially come about.

Posted by armand at January 20, 2005 01:08 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Law and the Courts


two thoughts:

1. this may be ultra-obvious, but doesn't it seem as though by renominating the 12 the bushies are really trying to force the republican caucus to kill the filibuster? i mean, they know the dems still have enough power to filibuster the 12, they know they still have the inclination, so what would be the point unless it's to force an end to the filibuster (or the 60-vote variation thereon, anyway) in an area that a vast majority of the population pays no attention to in advance of what will almost certainly be one, and quite possibly more, supreme court seats opening up? how convenient for the republicans if the filibuster rule is eviscerated in time for confirming a new associate, a new chief, etc.

2. how are the accommodations proposed in that article really accommodations. they all basically entail the nominees in question getting their supposed seats at the table. and the bottom line is, plenty of right wing judges got confirmed in the last term; these are the most radical of the radical, and there's a reason the dems are drawing the line.

Posted by: joshua at January 21, 2005 10:22 AM | PERMALINK

As to point 1 - I strongly agree with your analysis. It's clear that they'd love that. As to point 2 - they are accomodations in the sense that the Democrats would get something too - even if it's just, say, 1 Democratic judge to "balance" 4 or 5 Republicans. The article notes that that's be done for years in certain areas, so there is precedent for it. Though of course really that's only relevant in the dispute over the Michigan seats on the 6th Circuit. The fights over the other nominees can't really be "accomodated". The fights over the Priscilla Owens types - those will continue since they are basic black/white ideological battles.

Posted by: Armand at January 24, 2005 09:59 AM | PERMALINK

Unless the Dems roll over and die in this Congress. Reid and some of the other ranking Dems have made noises about filibustering and being obstructionist, but have not actually done any obstructing. Neither Rice nor Gonzalez are looking like they will be opposed by any large numbers of Dems. Granted, that's not a good measure of "obstuctionism" (there is a strong school of "the prez should get his people" in the Senate"), but it should mean something.

Are they men or mice?

Posted by: baltar at January 25, 2005 02:16 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment

Remember personal info?