ConfirmThem

http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDE3ZmY2NDhhODc2ODMwNDkxNTNmYzZm...

"The Legal Times profiles Vanessa Ruiz, a judge on the D.C. Court of Appeals that some are pushing for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The article also mentions two others that may be under consideration for spots on the the D.C. Circuit: private attorney Joseph Sellers, a top employment law plaintiffs lawyer (and alum of a very fine law school), and Harvard law professor Martha Minow."

for starting a new thread. This subject certainly needs attention....

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/legal_beat/2009/04/7th-circuit-nominee-to-go...

"Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy announced Tuesday that 7th Circuit nominee David F. Hamilton would make a second appearance before the committee.

Leahy bowed to committee Republicans, who argued that the committee's April 1 hearing on Hamilton's nomination came too soon after President Obama nominated him on March 17. Republicans boycotted the April 1 hearing. Leahy said Hamilton would appear again on April 29.

"It has been four weeks since Judge Hamilton first appeared before the Committee, and I am disappointed that Committee Republicans have yet to ask a single question of this nominee," Leahy said. "Nonetheless, at the request of the ranking member, I have invited Judge Hamilton to testify on April 29. Judge Hamilton has the strong support of his home state senators, Senator Lugar and Senator Bayh. After Judge Hamilton appears again before the Committee, I hope Republican members will not further delay our consideration of this qualified judicial nominee."

The committee's April 29 meeting will also serve as a confirmation hearing for 4th Circuit nominee Andre Davis, and Thomas E. Perez of Maryland to be the Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division."

http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTQxNWFjNThmZmQ5NDRjZjgyZDk4YjFj...

"On April 2, President Obama nominated federal district judge Andre M. Davis to a vacancy on the Fourth Circuit that has been open since 2000 (and to which President Clinton had nominated Davis in mid-October 2000, far too late to have any reasonable basis to expect action on the nomination). Despite the fact that Davis has more than 14 years of district-court rulings for committee staffers to review, Judiciary Committee chairman Leahy has scheduled a hearing on Davis’s nomination for next Wednesday, April 29—less than four weeks after his nomination.

To put this rush in context: During the Bush 43 administration, the average time from nomination to hearing for federal appellate nominees was 166 days overall, and 197 days while Leahy was chairman.

At that same proceeding on April 29, the Judiciary Committee will conduct its second review (after the sham first) of David F. Hamilton’s nomination to the Seventh Circuit and its review of the nomination of Thomas E. Perez to be AAG for the Civil Rights Division. This review of Hamilton comes only 43 days after his nomination, despite the fact that Hamilton has authored more than 1200 opinions in nearly 15 years as a federal district judge and submitted approximately 2,000 pages of speeches and articles."

Just as I predicted, Obama (tho he's being very quiet about it) is focused like a laser on the Judiciary, and Leahy & Reid will do whatever the WH tells them to do to get the agenda enforcers confirmed.

Bush and his people knew little about judges and cared less, while Frist, McConnell & Specter refused to fight for reasons best not discussed in polite company. Democrats care about judges, some Republicans apparently don't. There will not be a vacancy without a nominee by the 4th of July, sooner if the economy stabilizes.

Elections have consequences.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

The GOP JudComm Senators can't even mount a coherent campaign to push Obama to renominate Keisler and a couple other stalled Bush nominees as a show of bipartisanship. Unbelievable.

The worst legacy of W will be that skills (esp of the communication), strategy & tactics don't matter, just "loyalty", fealty to short-term power, and staying on "message". Oops.

Huntsman or Sanford may well win in '12. They won't have more than a handful of vacancies to fill, and they'll probably have 60+ Dem senators to deal with, but hopefully Nino & AMK will still be Up There.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

URGENT HOT PETITION! Please click, sign, and WE WILL FAX your petition automatically to ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS right away (saving you hours of labor)!

Breaking News Update:

Heroic Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) just vowed to filibuster federal Judge David Hamilton, the bad judge who issued controversial rulings (banning public prayers offered "in Jesus name," and hastening the abortion of unborn children). Sen. Inhofe agrees we should stop Hamilton's nomination to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals,the same court that reversed his liberal, activist, aggressive decisions for many years.

To support Sen. Inhofe, and stop Hamilton, we first need solidarity among any good conservatives or moderates seated on the 19-member Senate Judiciary Comittee, especially Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA). Then we need 40 strong Senate votes (including Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE, both Arkansas Senators Pryor and Lincoln, D-AR, both Maine Senators Collins and Snowe, R-ME, and all Senators in either party from southern states), to inhibit the majority cloture vote, and help Sen. Inhofe prevent Hamilton from getting a final floor vote.

We're now the leading national voice against Hamilton, and we're getting results. But the mainstream media is ignoring Hamilton's anti-Christian bias, so would you please help me, by forwarding this email to any TV, radio, print, or blog reporters you know, and asking them to contact me for an interview, through my web-site?

To oppose Hamilton, we've already put in 240,000+ fax petitions to the U.S. Senate, and now we're getting traction, to the horror of many liberal groups (including the National Abortion Rights Action League who is actively campaigning FOR Hamilton). Can you please help us reach our goal of 1,000,000 faxes against Hamilton?

PLEASE SELECT HERE TO SIGN AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS, OPPOSING THE ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-CHRISTIAN JUDGE DAVID HAMILTON.

Judge Hamilton is the worst of Obama's 15 new liberal appeals court appointees. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals covers Wisconsin, Indiana and Illinois. Since most cases never reach the Supreme Court, the federal appellate circuits often provide the last word on cases affecting life and liberty.

READ THE FACTS:

The Judicial Confirmation Network quickly opposed Hamilton's nomination, stating that "President Obama's first nominee to the federal appeals courts -- specifically the appeals court based in Chicago -- is an ultra-liberal named David Hamilton who is a former fundraiser for ACORN and former leader of the Indiana chapter of the ACLU. He was nominated to the district court bench by President Clinton even though he had no judicial experience and was rated as ‘not qualified' by the American Bar Association ."

Hamilton ruled in 2005 to ban the practice of opening the chamber's business with prayers mentioning Jesus Christ or using terms such as "Savior." He said that amounted to state endorsement of a religion. (But he ruled prayers to "Allah" were perfectly lawful.)

ANTI-JESUS, BUT PRO-ALLAH?

Judge Hamilton wrote: "The injunction orders the Speaker...that the prayers should not use Christ's name or title or any other denominational appeal...If those offering prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives choose to use the Arabic 'Allah'...the court sees little risk that the choice of language would advance a particular religion or disparage others.

In other words, Judge Hamilton ruled the words "Jesus" or "Christ" are illegal words, prohibited for public speech, banned by the First Amendment, which somehow prohibits freedom of religious expression, and makes Christian prayers ILLEGAL in a public forum. (What crazy version of the First Amendment is he reading?)

Thank God, we took action in 2007 and provided legal arguments to the Indiana Attorney General who appealed to the 7th Circuit Court and WE WON a 2-1 decision overruling Hamilton, restoring the right to pray "in Jesus name" in Indiana.

PLEASE SELECT HERE TO SIGN AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS, OPPOSING THE ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-CHRISTIAN JUDGE DAVID HAMILTON.

ANTI-LIFE BUT PRO-ABORTION?

In 2003, Judge Hamilton struck down part of an Indiana law on abortion. The reasonable law had required abortion clinics to simply give women information about alternatives to abortion in the presence of a physician or nurse, 18 hours before the procedure, until Hamilton ruled to hasten abortions . But thank God, the 7th Circuit Court also reversed Hamilton's bad decision in that case.

If confirmed now Hamilton will sit on that 7th Circuit Court (the same court that frequently overruled him) with terrible power to rule the heartland with his anti-life, anti-liberty, anti-Christian agenda.

WE CAN WIN THIS BATTLE!

We've already sent thousands of faxes to the full Senate, and we're getting results! On April 1st, Senator Orrin Hatch led all Republicans to walk out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in protest against the Democrat "rush job" to confirm Judge Hamilton. Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, said he was troubled by Hamilton's ruling against a sectarian prayer to open the Indiana House of Representatives. Even Senator Arlen Specter expressed concern. But will they vote unanimously against Hamilton?

Unfortunately retiring RINO Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) endorsed Hamilton, endangering his own state of Indiana and ruining his own legacy. Lugar's five phone numbers are: Indianapolis (317) 226-5555, Evansville (812) 465-6313, Fort Wayne (260) 422-1505, Valparaiso (219) 548-8035, DC Office (202) 224-4814. Everybody please call all five numbers today, and especially ask your Indiana friends to call Sen. Lugar. You might even call both U.S. Senators from your own state, at 202-225-3121.

But remember, 100 emails = 10 phone calls = 1 fax in political capital, since the Senate staffers must handle each paper and usually write a reply. So please join our automated fax-petition campaign first. Then please forward this email to your Indiana-Illinois-Wisconsin friends, and to all pastors in all 50 states, and select here to download a church flyer that pastors can copy and distribute.

But first, take action right now! I pray you will not hesitate, but sign the petition and WE WILL FAX your petition right away, automatically to all 100 U.S. Senators.

PLEASE SELECT HERE TO SIGN AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS, OPPOSING THE ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-CHRISTIAN JUDGE DAVID HAMILTON.

God Bless you, in Jesus' name,

Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt

P.S. Time is urgent! The Senate could vote on Hamilton as early as this coming week. If you click and sign today, we will forward your name immediately. Please don't wait another minute. Life, Liberty, and Jesus are too important to be banned by one extremist judge.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_next_war_over_the_courts

"The judicial-nomination wars are back. With 84 vacant and soon-to-be-open seats on the lower federal courts, as well as potential openings on the Supreme Court at the close of the term, conservatives are primed for a fight over even the most moderate nominees. Early signs indicate that the White House is reluctantly entering this fray with a less-than-fully-baked game plan that could simultaneously undermine the president's chances to change the direction of the federal courts and stall his broader agenda."

I just read reports from CNN that Specter may switch to the Democratic party.

http://www.cnn.com

Breaking News: Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter will switch from the Republican to the Democratic Party, multiple sources tell CNN.

This means that the Democrats get a filibuster-proof margin in the Senate (assuming that Franken wins Minnesota).

While it is a real disappointment to have Specter leave the GOP, I wonder what that will do to the Judiciary commmittee. Will Specter be given the chairmanship? Will a Democrat leave the committee and another GOP senator join it?

I've refrained from posting since the election of Obama because I didn't want to drive myself into a tizzy. Rather than tie myself up in knots, I decided to view the first 100 days of Lord Obama with something more than just passing interest. Even though I didn't view things daily, it has been hard to ignore what has taken place.

Since this is a site for judicial commentary, I won't delve into the hostile takeover of our economy by Obama. Rather, I'll just give a few thoughts on what will surely be a full fledged frontal assualt on our Constitution. We've seen the beginnings of this attack with some of Obama's executive orders, but the real pain will come through the judical appointment process.

An earlier commenter made the point that Bush, Frist,and Rove never really cared about judges. That is exactly true. We need only remember the Harriet Miers saga to confirm this notion. Rather than energize the base at critical moments, the previous Republican leaders ignored us and, in the end, kept many qualified conservative judges off the courts. Inaction and inattention may have lost the fourth circuit for a generation.

As a former law professor, Obama will not miss his opportunity to remake the federal courts in his own liberal mold. With little or no roadblocks, he will pack the courts with judges who will find rights for every man, woman, child, dog, and unicorn out there. Traditional views of life and society will become relics. Unfortunately, he will conduct a successful silent coup on the courts.

Now that a bit of time has passed, it's fair to say Bush and his adminstration betrayed the conservative movement. He destroyed the Republican party and it could be a decade or more before we have reasonable chance at regaining power in the House and Senate. For the time being, the Supreme Court is relatively safe, but who's to say Kennedy won't call it quits, or even Souter. That would give dominance back to the liberals.

It will be interesting to see if the party has any desire to block some of Obama's nominees to the courts. It's likely they won't. McConnell has shown no desire to fight and I suspect he and others feel the courts are just a sideshow. I worried the 2008 election could be a repeat of 1932 and it now appears we're going to ge the court packing without adding extra seats.

Oh how I miss the days of discussing who could be the next conservative nominee to the Supreme Court. I suspect that person is in law school right now. Sigh.

Specter to get new Judiciary subcommittee:

http://www.rollcall.com/news/34403-1.html

"Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) will likely create a new subcommittee for recent Democratic convert Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) to chair during this Congress, senior Senate Democratic sources said on Wednesday."

Top Dems rebel against Specter taking seniority over them:

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/top-dems-rebel-on-specter-2009-04-29...

"Senior Senate Democrats are objecting to the deal Majority Leader Harry Reid made with Sen. Arlen Specter, saying they will vote against letting the former Republican shoot to the top of powerful committees after he switches parties."

"One senior Democratic lawmaker told The Hill that the Democratic Conference will vote against giving the longtime Pennsylvania Republican seniority over lawmakers like Harkin, Mikulski and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) when they hold their organizational meeting after the 2010 election."

"Since Reid and Specter announced their deal, Senate insiders have speculated that Specter could bump Harkin after the election from his chairmanship of the powerful Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services subcommittee or return to be chairman of Judiciary if the current chairman, Leahy, takes over the gavel at Appropriations."

They could get him to lead a move toward what they fought against tooth and nail in the Bush years - having a set schedule for getting nominees through committee hearings, a committee vote, and a floor vote. Specter long wanted this, and now that it would benefit Leahy and company they will be less likely to crap all over it like they did for years. Can't you picture Leahy on the tube complaining about the hypocrisy of the GOP committee members if they wouldn't back such a proposal?

<< Oh how I miss the days of discussing who could be the next conservative nominee to the Supreme Court. I suspect that person is in law school right now. Sigh. >>

Perhaps, but the next conservative Justice could just as easily join the Court in 2013. See my answer to the fourth question here.

I sure hope you're right, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.

As for Jay Bybee and impeachment, I wouldn't be surprise to see the Democrats make a serious effort to remove numerous conservative judges, especially after the 2010 elections. Given the landscape, it's quite possible there could be 67 or more Democrats in the Senate beginning in 2011. The filibuster would be dead.

I know it sounds unlikely, but look at what Obama has done so far. He's nationalized banks and given half of Chrysler to the UAW. Despite all this, Obama's popularity is soaring. Who's to say he won't be able to convince the public some judges were renegades, especially if they were involved in the torture memos. Even better, he might say they are impeding his efforts to renew America.

Given the public's blind eye to Obama, it's possible, not probable, many would say OK to him. Or, if he has successfully distracted people on another issue, the move could be made while nonbody's watching.

I don't think this will happen, but it wouldn't surprise me. Liberals think they have taken control of the government for next 40 years. Why would they let a few judges stand in their way?

1. Whacker77--Welcome back!

2. Could we please have a separate post re Specter and related matters, along with a new thread for such?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30508968

Could be red herring. Nothing anywhere else.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103694193

kossacks ecstatic: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/30/726606/-NPR-Reporting-Souter-to-...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/30/726597/-BREAKING:-MSNBCNPR-Repor...

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

The end is nigh! I guess it should come as no surprise that David Souter decided to slither out of town now that Lord Obama is at the helm. At least this does nothing to change the conservative/liberal balance of the Court. The sad news is JPS and Ruth will follow in the each of the next two years.

From our standpoint, the future of conservative legal reasoning as it pertains to the Constitution depends on Kennedy and Scalia. I know Scalia would never leave the Court under this president, but Kennedy is a whole different story.

The Supreme Court was the jewel of the 2008 election and Republicans never grasped that.

Sonia Sotomeyer, possibly?

I guess I was a fortune teller when I mentioned in my first comment that Souter might slip now that Obama is president. Since none of us favor the filibuster, we're basically screwed. Still, I hope at least 30 Republicans vote against whomever the pick happens to be. We need to show some backbone while acknowleding that elections have consequences.

Already, some publications are posting short lists, and already, the short lists that I'm seeing contain names that are utterly far-fetched. Obama isn't going to choose a male to replace Souter, so over the next few days, can the media please leave Deval Patrick and Cass Sunstein's names off their ridiculous, poorly thought-out lists? In addition, Obama is *not* going to choose Hillary Clinton under any circumstances, so can the media also please take her name off their lists?

Although there always could be a surprise (he's made noises about wanting a non-judge), I still don't think Obama will chance it with his first vacancy. So I think it'll be either Sotomayor, Kagan, Wood, Wardlaw, Sears, or (less likely) McKeown. I don't think he can get away with Sullivan or Roseborough (since they haven't ever been judges). I also don't think he'd feel comfortable proceeding with Rawlinson (and probably not Ann Claire Williams), given clear ideological questions. And while Granholm's name has come up a lot, I don't think he'll choose a sitting politician -- especially one who wasn't even born in the U.S.

So those are my (boring) predictions: like everyone else, I think it'll most likely be Sotomayor, followed by either Kagan or Wood. Clip and save!