An attempt at a Bushie Judicial Legacy
Here's a brief summary of just the first three of the 20 partisan judges re-nominated by President Bush.
William Myers III has never been a judge and spent most of his career as a lobbyist for the cattle and mining industry.[1] He has written that all habitat conservation laws are unconstitutional because they interfere with potential profit.[2] In 2001, Bush appointed him as the chief lawyer for the Department of the Interior. In that role he continued as a champion of corporate interests, setting his agenda in meetings with former employers he promised not to speak with, and even illegally giving away sacred Native American land to be strip mined.[3]
Terrence Boyle was a legal aide to Jesse Helms. As a judge, his signature decisions have attempted to circumvent federal laws barring employment discrimination by race, gender, and disability.[4] His rulings have been overturned a staggering 120 times by the conservative 4th District Court of Appeals, either due to gross errors in judgment or simple incompetence.[5]
William Pryor Jr. served as Attorney General of Alabama, where he took money from Phillip Morris, fought against the anti-tobacco lawsuit until it was almost over, and cost the people of Alabama billions in settlement money for their healthcare system as a result.[6] He called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history," and has consistently argued against the federal protections for the civil rights of minorities, lesbian and gay couples, women, and the disabled.[7]
[1] "Unfit to Judge," Community Rights Council, 4/2/04.
[2] "Myers Troubling Legal Philosophy," People for the American Way.
[3] "Environmental Group Calls on Senate to Block Myers Nomination: Ethical Problems and Anti-Environmental Activism Make Him Unfit for Judgeship," Friends of the Earth, 2/5/05.
[4] "Federal Judge Terrence Boyle Unfit for Promotion to Appeals Court," People for the American Way, 2/23/05.
[5] "Eastern District of North Carolina Terrence Boyle Nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit," Alliance for Justice.
[6] Eric Fleischauer, "Pryor Called a Tobacco Sellout," Decatur Daily News, 10/30/02.
[7] Ann Woolner, "Bush Judicial Candidate Shows How Things Change," Bloomberg News, 5/16/03.
4 comments:
And since the Senate is about to go nuclear and stop the Democrats from playing the unConstitutional supermajority vote and fillibuster, I guess they'll all make fine judges!
SS, you miss my point. Until fairly recently, a judicial nominee who got out of committee was subject to an up or down simple majority vote. This whole idea of a supermajority with filibusters possible was began by the Democrats; there's nothing in the Senate Rules of Order or the Constitution that allow this. So the so-called "nuclear option" simply enforces existing Senate rules.
The Fortas filibuster was a quirk and AFAIK the GOP did not use it as a standard tactic for all nominees they didn't like, unlike the current Democrats. Big difference.
On the Framers intent behind Senate appointments:The Appointments Clause of the Constitution requires the consent of the Senate before judicial nominees are appointed. The Rules of Proceedings Clause gives the Senate the power to determine the method of consent.
James Madison wrote in The Federalist Papers that "measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." The Senate was created, in part, to prevent the problems associated with the tyranny of the majority.
On the Republicans not using the filibuster:On March 9, 2000, Frist participated in a filibuster of Richard Paez, President Clinton's nominee to the Ninth Circuit.
Paez was only one of at least six filibusters Republicans attempted during the Clinton years.
In 1994 Senator Hatch added language to the Senate rules for confirming nominees. His objective: to allow a single senator to easily--and secretly--block nominations from leaving committee. It worked, epublicans were able to block more than sixty of Clinton's nominations.
On Republican "Values":In 2002-03, when Republican staffers from the Judiciary Committee hacked into Democratic computers and stole hundreds of files. Fifteen of those confidential memos, which detailed Democratic strategies for fighting the most extreme Bush judicial nominees, were then leaked to friendly conservative media outlets like the Washington Times, columnist Bob Novak and the Wall Street Journal editorial page.
The Nation
Post a Comment