REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

"GOP Telegraphs Mass Filibuster Of Obama’s Top Judges"

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Friday, August 2, 2013 12:14
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 737
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, August 2, 2013 5:29 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Senate Republicans are standing firm by their threat to block every one of President Obama’s nominees to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, insisting on eliminating all three vacant seats on the country’s second most powerful court.

The first of Obama’s three picks, Patricia Millett, was narrowly approved Thursday by the Judiciary Committee on a party line vote of 10-8. Every Republican voted against her, although they didn’t criticize her or take issue with her qualifications. They merely argued that the court is under-worked and that nobody ought to fill those seats.

“I have nothing against her but we should not be adding to that bench,” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), a senior Republican on the committee, told TPM on Thursday afternoon.

Republicans appear to be united behind Sen. Chuck Grassley’s (R-IA) legislation to reduce the number of active judges on the D.C. Circuit court from 11 to eight. He proposes eliminating one seat, transferring one to the Second Circuit and transferring another to the 11th Circuit. (During the Bush administration, Grassley led a successful effort to reduce the size of the D.C. Circuit court from 12 to 11.)

“It’s way overstaffed,” Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), another Judiciary Committee member, told TPM on Thursday. “It does not need these judges, and we don’t have the money.”

Democrats flatly dismiss the Grassley effort as a ploy to maintain the strong conservative tilt of the court, which often has the final word over the constitutionality of executive power decisions and has invalidated various executive actions by President Obama, on issues like labor and environmental regulations and recess appointments. They argue that despite the court’s relatively low caseload, it takes extraordinarily complex cases.

“The D.C. Circuit decides some of the most important cases in our nation, with significant impact on the lives of all Americans,” said Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT). “This court must be allowed to operate at full strength, and to that end, I applaud the Judiciary Committee’s approval of Patricia Millett’s nomination today.”

If Republicans stand by their threat and filibuster, it’ll leave Democrats with a tough choice: either back off and concede defeat, or threaten to roll back the filibuster on a partisan basis via the nuclear option and confirm the judges by themselves.

A number of senators, especially supporters of abortion rights, worry about what a future Republican president and Senate majority might do with that power. If Republicans filibuster Millett, Senate Democrats face significant pressure to invoke the nuclear option.

Democrats’ other option is to negotiate with Republicans to let some, if not all, of the nominees through. But that would be difficult given what’s at stake, unless party leaders can credibly threaten to change the rules if Republicans maintain their blockade.

When TPM asked Sessions if Republicans should worry about Democrats potentially going nuclear, he smiled, as if to preemptively call bluff.

“Unless Democrats are prepared to say they’ll never filibuster a federal judge or never filibuster a cabinet person, I don’t think that their threat should be given much weight,” Sessions said. “If they say [Republicans can’t filibuster nominees] then they’ll bind themselves to that if we have a Republican president.” Excerpts from http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/08/gop-telegraphs-mass-filibus
ter-of-top-judicial-nominees.php?ref=fpa



A blackmail...er, "Democracy"...ain't it great?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2013 6:14 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Harry Reid needs to do something about the filibuster. And, he can.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2013 6:34 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


saw a piece the other day where the R's approved some. The writer suggested that it was a hopeful sign, that they were coming around. Not sure which appointees they were, or at what stage. This one is a story that I don't follow closely, even tho' I acknowledge its importance.


E-T-A-- Ah. The bottom half of the piece in your THUD thread refers to the approvals I saw the hopeful story about.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2013 6:52 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


They can change the rules to make a filibuster more difficult. Right now, all anyone has to do is stand up for 30 seconds (or less) and say "I intend to filibuster". That means there is no barrier whatsoever against blocking the will of the majority, on items large and small. You should make people stand up and talk - literally, or allow only five filibusters in a year, or insert any number of other impediments or inconveniences into the process.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2013 8:43 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
They can change the rules to make a filibuster more difficult. Right now, all anyone has to do is stand up for 30 seconds (or less) and say "I intend to filibuster". That means there is no barrier whatsoever against blocking the will of the majority, on items large and small. You should make people stand up and talk - literally, or allow only five filibusters in a year, or insert any number of other impediments or inconveniences into the process.




That is, in fact, what the lady did in Texas earlier this year.

Maybe what the opposition party should do is call their bluff. "OK, bozo, you intend to filibuster? On yer feet, let's see you do it RIGHT NOW. Or else let's vote. NOW. Put up or shut up! Bet, or get off the pot."
Probably stop the nonsense after the first day.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2013 12:14 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Sig, NewOld, we've been around the horn on this how many times? A PROPER filibuster is what's needed, and at one time I believe Reid was considering it (back when they can change the rules at the beginning, if I recall, but I'm not sure). That's where both sides show their lack of backbone; I understand the conundrum about doing away with it completely, but what Wendy did is what they ALL should have to do.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL