Post by flylooper on Nov 17, 2009 9:32:35 GMT -5
BHD wrotie
I've been saying that this is what he Dems will run ad nauseum. The GOP is a tottaly obstructionist party in its present form. It's almost rope-a-dope like in that the Dem leadership has been remarkably quiet about it. almost letting the GOP punch itself out.
Sessions to try to filibuster Obama judicial nominee
The Dems retook control of Congress and Truman won the biggest presidential election upset ever that November. (Don't be surprised if you see a revival of that tactic next summer...)
I've been saying that this is what he Dems will run ad nauseum. The GOP is a tottaly obstructionist party in its present form. It's almost rope-a-dope like in that the Dem leadership has been remarkably quiet about it. almost letting the GOP punch itself out.
Sessions to try to filibuster Obama judicial nominee
The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee will try to block the Obama administration’s first nominee to the federal bench, a retaliation for Democratic filibusters to Bush’s choices for federal bench in the previous eight years.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said Monday he would vote against a procedural motion that would end debate on the nomination of David Hamilton of Indiana for the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Conservatives have been split over whether to filibuster the nomination.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) plans to move forward with approving Hamilton Tuesday. Sessions’ tactic is likely to fail, as Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) has expressed his support for the nominee.
Sessions underscored that this tactic was not standard. It was long an unwritten rule in the Senate that lawmakers would not filibuster judicial nominees, but would rather simply vote against their appointment. Sessions, however, said the “rule has changed” – referring to when Democrats held up a number of Bush’s picks. Sessions called the Senate’s climate “a sad state of affairs, or good state of affairs, depending how you believe.”
Sessions himself was the victim of a judicial filibuster in 1986, when the Senate blocked his nomination to the federal bench. During Bush's years in the White House, he was vehemently opposed to the tactic, once urging his colleagues to move to an up-and-down vote on a nominee by saying on the Senate floor that the constitution says the “Senate shall advise and consent on treaties by a two-thirds vote, and simply ‘shall advise and consent’ on nominations.”
Despite support from both Lugar and Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Sessions implied that Hamilton is not “committed to the law.” The nominee, he said, fits the fungible “extraordinary circumstance” standard he requires for filibusters, originally established by the bipartisan Gang of 14. Sessions cited the nominee’s involvement with the American Civil Liberties Union and a judicial decision that blocked waiting period for abortions. Sessions said Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not fit that standard.
“I believe strongly that a judge takes that oath to be impartial to serve under the constitution and activism, as I define the phrase, is when a judge allows their personal view to override their commitment to the law,” Sessions said.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said Monday he would vote against a procedural motion that would end debate on the nomination of David Hamilton of Indiana for the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Conservatives have been split over whether to filibuster the nomination.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) plans to move forward with approving Hamilton Tuesday. Sessions’ tactic is likely to fail, as Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) has expressed his support for the nominee.
Sessions underscored that this tactic was not standard. It was long an unwritten rule in the Senate that lawmakers would not filibuster judicial nominees, but would rather simply vote against their appointment. Sessions, however, said the “rule has changed” – referring to when Democrats held up a number of Bush’s picks. Sessions called the Senate’s climate “a sad state of affairs, or good state of affairs, depending how you believe.”
Sessions himself was the victim of a judicial filibuster in 1986, when the Senate blocked his nomination to the federal bench. During Bush's years in the White House, he was vehemently opposed to the tactic, once urging his colleagues to move to an up-and-down vote on a nominee by saying on the Senate floor that the constitution says the “Senate shall advise and consent on treaties by a two-thirds vote, and simply ‘shall advise and consent’ on nominations.”
Despite support from both Lugar and Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Sessions implied that Hamilton is not “committed to the law.” The nominee, he said, fits the fungible “extraordinary circumstance” standard he requires for filibusters, originally established by the bipartisan Gang of 14. Sessions cited the nominee’s involvement with the American Civil Liberties Union and a judicial decision that blocked waiting period for abortions. Sessions said Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not fit that standard.
“I believe strongly that a judge takes that oath to be impartial to serve under the constitution and activism, as I define the phrase, is when a judge allows their personal view to override their commitment to the law,” Sessions said.