ConfirmThem

http://afjjusticewatch.blogspot.com/2008/03/congress-may-be-resting-but-...

"Even though Congress is currently out on recess, we are still working hard to restore balance to our nation's courts. We are continuing to monitor President Bush's pending judicial nominees, as well as our efforts to educate the public on what will be Bush's most lasting legacy - a more conservative federal bench."

"A prime example of Bush's courtpacking efforts can been found in what he has managed to do to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, a court that handles cases from Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. With the exception of one seat, President Bush has filled every vacancy on that circuit with conservative judges. In his attempt to fill the final remaining seat, Bush has put forward another controversial nominee, Catherina Haynes."

"We need to be prepared to fight President Bush's attempts to push through his remaining ultra-conservative nominees when Congress returns."

Who is the one seat that is not conservative that W appointed?

The answer is Prado (even though they still don't like him):

http://www.afj.org/about-afj/press/packing-the-fifth-circuit.html

"Though viewed as a moderate on criminal justice issues, Judge Prado’s record reveals a crabbed interpretation of rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as a begrudging attitude towards civil rights actions."

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2008/03/peter-keisler-r.html

"Former acting U.S. Attorney General Peter Keisler will rejoin Sidley Austin’s Washington office next month as a partner in the firm’s appellate practice. President Bush appointed Keisler as acting AG in September, after Alberto Gonzales resigned.

Keisler left Sidley in 2002 to join the Department of Justice. He spent most of his time there as assistant attorney general for the Civil Division. Keisler has been a controversial figure in the Bush Administration. Keisler was twice-nominated by Bush to fill the seat left vacant on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit when Chief Justice John Roberts left for the Supreme Court. So far, that nomination has been stalled by Senate Democrats.

In a press release, Keisler said it was “a tremendous privilege” to serve at Justice. “I am thrilled to be returning to Sidley to work with colleagues I hold in the highest esteem,” he added."

http://www.sidley.com/newsresources/newsandpress/Detail.aspx?news=3520

"'Peter is one of the most accomplished, respected and admired lawyers in Washington today,' said Carter Phillips, managing partner of Sidley’s Washington, D.C. office. 'We could not be more proud that he has chosen to rejoin us and focus his considerable talents on serving Sidley’s clients.'

"'It is a pleasure to 'welcome home' a colleague after his years of public service,' said Tom Cole, Chair of the firm’s Executive Committee. 'Peter is highly regarded and enormously well liked both inside and outside the firm.'"

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002691165

"A key Democratic lawmaker fired a new rhetorical blast Thursday in an ongoing battle over Bush administration nominees.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont said Republicans are blocking several of the president’s nominees to senior Justice Department positions."

"But Leahy signaled in his letter that Bush’s latest nomination to the 4th Circuit court is headed for confirmation. Leahy pointed out that the new nominee, Steven Agee of Virginia, has the support of both of his home state senators (one a Republican and one a Democrat), unlike Bush’s last nominee for the same seat.

“I urge you to work with senators from other states, as well, so that we might make progress before time runs out on your presidency and the Thurmond rule precludes additional confirmations,” Leahy said."

What a farce. But I guess we're stuck with it....

FYI, a hearing is scheduled for April 3 for four District Court nominees - two Virginia, two Missouri.

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=3227

Of course, no Circuit Court...

The SJC Meeting for the 4 District Court nominees will be chaired by Senator Kohl. Again, is there something wrong with Senator Leahy's physical or mental health? During the last 9 months, I believe that about half of the meeting have been chaired by someone other than the chairman. Is his inability to chair these meetings the reason why so few hearings and business meetings have been held?

During the first 3 months of 2008, there have been 0, yes, 0 nominees confirmed. Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the Thurmond rule didn't go into effect until the summer break of the last year of a President's term, not the beginning of the last year.

Are we witnessing a new Leahy rule here or is the Senator trying to do his best imitation of Justice Douglass during his final years? Does Leahy have the stamina to do the job as chairman. I guess you could say it Depends.

Leahy made comments last fall that he was beginning the Thurmond Rule in January. Since that time he has quietly backtracked and made comments to the effect that the Thurmond Rule wouldn't start until July. I think Reid and Leahy way back on November 7, 2006 decided to slow-walk all the Bush judicial nominees in retribution for what they regard as the obstruction of Clinton judicial nominees by the Republicans in the 105th and 106th Congresses.

In 2007, Leahy began allowing people like Whitehouse and Cardin to chair SJC hearings. This year, Feinstein joined the list. Now we have Kohl. This probably means nothing except more than Leahy increasingly distancing himself from the whole judicial confirmation process. Since he knows only the noncontroversial nominees will get hearings, there is no reason for him to appear at the hearings as the prime ideological interrogator of the nominees. Rather, he can concentrate his time on what he considers to be more pressing topics like detainee treatment, NSA wiretapping and the U.S. Attorneys' firing.

David Mamet is no longer a "brain-dead" liberal:

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0811,374064,374064,1.html/full Be sure to glance at the comments; I though the Voice was pure Kos.

WSJ on Grisham & Judicial Elections:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120596897660350203.html?mod=loomia&loomi...

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

Wow. I had no idea that SJC Chairman Leahy made a prior statement to put in place the Thurmond rule in January. I'm not so sure it is not already in place. No confirmations in January, February and March. Leahy's conduct is certainly consistent with this type of statement. If true, then we should call it what it is--The Leahy Rule--so that the Reublicans can utilize it in 2010 and every even year thereafter.

It is unbelievable that Leahy/Reid are slow walking the [1] the hearings, [2] the business meetings to vote the nominees out of committee, and [3] the vote on the nominees before the full Senate. Some activity is taking place, but no results. There are 4 noncontroversial district court nominees sitting on the Executive Calendar since March 6. A simple voice vote would do. No wonder Leahy is not chairing any meetings. "Ask me no questions, I tell you no lies."

I think it is time to turn up the HEAT. Now is better than later. There appears to be a little activity on the front end of the process, but little or none at the back end. AGAIN, NO CONFIRMATIONS FOR JANUARY, FEBRUARY AND NOW MARCH. If there is one website that can get the ball rolling and put the spotlight on this issue, it is CONFIRM THEM.

NEW THREAD PLEASE.

I'll start a new thread soon. I just want to do some research about the Thurmond Rule first.

I knew you'd be on top of it!