ConfirmThem

Is anybody surprised?

When was Nan Aron not 'unjust'?

"Echoing the reasoning of the Roberts court's controversial decision that denied Alabama worker Lilly Ledbetter equal pay..."

Let me get this right, is Aron upset that Southwick is in line with present Supreme Court precedent? If he is, I think that such a thing should recommend and not condemn his nomination. After all, in general, isn't it a good thing if a judge can predict future Supreme Court trends?

It's a pretty safe bet they don't have the law on their side, else THAT is what they'd be arguing.

Reinhardt says it's the Supreme Court that's out of whack, not him. Surely Aron follows the same thinking.

NAn Aron proves the point--liberals appeal to emotion, conservatives to logic and reason.

However pathetic it may be, this Nan Aron effort clearly shows that the Rad-Libs have not given up the intense fight against Southwick. Expect the confirmation battle this Fall to be a long hard slog, with the outcome still unclear.

Bruce Fein, who has always been a bit of a libertarian loon, has lost it completely:

http://www.slate.com/id/2172547/nav/tap1/

He appears to be supporting impeaching Bush and Cheney, or at least trying.

Liberals love to have Fein as the token "conservative" guest speaker on their panels concerning the meaning of the Constitution. Personally, I think describing Fein as a "conservative" is a case of false advertising. Working in the Reagan White House doesn't mean that a person is still a conservative. Just ask Webb of Virginia.

http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2007/08/almarri_case_to.h...

"The Fourth Circuit Court on Wednesday agreed to reconsider the question of the President's power to order the capture inside the U.S., and the prolonged detention afterward in a military prison, of a civilian suspected of terrorist ties. A majority of the Circuit Court's judges voted to grant en banc review of Al-Marri v. Wright."

"The Circuit Court did not disclose how its members had voted on the en banc question, saying only that a majority had voted when polled to reconsider the case. The order said a hearing will be held at the Fourth Circuit's Oct. 31 session."

At best, the Republicans can get the following five COA nominees confirmed before the December break:

1) Peter Keisler
2) Leslie Southwick
3) Jennifer Walker Elrod
4) Catharina Haynes
5) John Tinder

8 circuit confirmations ultimately puts us above the pace of 1999.

But I look at this quote from the link:

UPDATE at 3:15 p.m. The Justice Department said on Monday that it will ask the full 12-member Fourth Circuit Court to reconsider en banc the panel decision in Al-Marri v. Wright (Circuit docket 06-7427). Howard Bashman's How Appealing blog now provides a link to the Fourth Circuit opinion.

Of course, the 4th circuit has 10 members, and both Widener and Wilkins' future senior status was known back in June. I assume those 2 were somehow included in the earlier count of 12.

A majority voting to overrule is a good sign, though. Motz and Gregory are the 2 liberals Clinton put on the 4th, but the other 3 aren't quite as bad.

This nomination is going to be tough. With Southwick, it appears that Leahy and Reid were willing to let him through until Ralph Neas started whining.

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200407/070704a.html

Senator Edwards has stood up to efforts by this President to pack the courts with people whose records do not demonstrate that they will be fair judges to all who come before them, rich or poor, Democrats or Republicans, or any race or background. He has expressed concerns about Bush nominees Judge Boyle as well as James Dever, a 40-year-old Federalist Society Member and Republican Party activist, and Robert Conrad, who also has a troubling record. President Bush has repeatedly claimed that he is opposed to judicial activism while he has simultaneously nominated activists for judicial positions.

A majority voting to overrule is a good sign, though. Motz and Gregory are the 2 liberals Clinton put on the 4th, but the other 3 aren't quite as bad.

Bush put in Gregory as part of the NewTone™. He was repaid with a knife in the back.

I will die (happily) of shock if 8 CCA nomimees are confirmed this year. Especially since a grand total of 3 (THREE) have been confirmed in the first 8 (EIGHT) months of this Session. That would mean that 5 (FIVE) would have to be confirmed in the remaining 3 (THREE) months of this year)! The math is rather daunting, wouldn't you say? Not to mention the majority (MAJORITY) Dem/Rad/Lib obstructionists in the Senate.

Major concern: GOP Senators must be alert next month not to sacrifice progress on other nominees (Elrod: SJC vote needed; Keisler: action needed; Conrad, Haynes, Tinder: Hearing needed as soon as ABA consents). Democrats have so far been predictably adept at delaying nominees farther down the pipeline while people focus myopically on the stage show of the publicized obstructed nominee of the 'moment' (presently Southwick-for the last 3 (THREE) months).

I'm emphasizing the months wasted by Dems because I'm not sure everyone here fully realizes how much time is passing.

Days elapsed since last CCA confirmation: 105

He renominated Gregory to the critical 4th circuit, to a seat with 2 R Senators, and gained nothing..

But he balked at the idea of renominating Helene White to a seat with 2 D Senators, gaining 3 CoA seats in the process (plus several district court nominations).

Yes, the Gregory reappointment was a mistake, restrospectively a disaster, perhaps Clinton's final infliction (to date) on our nation. But at the time in early 2001 it didn't seem to matter so much, no? It was only one seat, the Senate was 50-50 (soon to go 49-51 thanks to Jeffords), the 4th was safely conservative, and Bush had 4 or 8 more years to fill seats on the 4th. No problem, nest-ce pas? How time has passed!

As for the 6th Circuit, one must admit that Bush has filled 6 of the 8 vacant seats (admittedly it took 5 years). So in the end appointing White would have been giving one to get one. Would that have really been worth it, considering all the weakness and surrender implications?

In recent history, it seems that more nominees are confirmed at the end of the year than at the start.

As I understand it, in 1999, Clinton got no CoA nominees confirmed in the first few months of the year, and either 5 or 6 in the last 4 months.

Bush had no way of knowing, at the time, that John Edwards would try to play Jesse Helms, that Sarbanes and Graham would squash nominees for their home states, that Graham would squash nominees for other home states, or the other host of problems that have occured with some of the most useless Senators in the Country.

Even so, I have no idea why Gregory was not packaged with Boyle, at the very least, who was nominated at the same time.

One wonders whether Bush will receive the same pair of olive branch re-nominees he offered. At least with Parker on the 2nd, Bush had the excuse that guard dog Schumer was there. The TX or the MS seats might have been a possibility, but those look like they'll all be filled.

Here's the ABA's 106th Congress scorecard:

http://www.abanet.org/scfedjud/ratings/ratings106.pdf

The last confirmed nominee there was Johnnie Rawlinson, nominated 2/22/00.

Interesting to note Helene White's ABA rating, if nothing else (not that such things matter when you are related to Senators)

Although five nominees (Keisler, Southwick, Elrod, Haynes and Tinder) COULD be confirmed this fall, that doesn't mean all five WILL be confirmed. The Dems could still stall on Keisler (in which case I think he should be recess-appointed in December). In addition, if Southwick is confirmed to the Fifth Circuit, the Dems could slow walk Elrod and/or Haynes by saying that there is less of a workload need on the Fifth with Southwick's confirmation. In general, I think Haynes is more likely to be stalled than Elrod simply because Elrod already has an ABA rating and has had hearing. By stalling Haynes and Tinder, the Dems can save up two nominees they can easily confirm in 2008 during the reign of the Thurmond Rule so that they can appear "nonpartisan". It could be a similar situation to last year when the Dems stalled noncontroversial nominees Livingston and Hardiman just in order to have some easy nominees to confirm during the next year.

In general, it is unlikely that Leahy and Reid will allow any Fourth Circuit nominee to be confirmed before the presidential election. In the short term, they won't want any conservative confirmation to the Fourth Circuit until the en banc al-Marri case is heard and decided. In the long term, they will want to keep the Fourth Circuit open for a Dem president in 2009 to fill with liberals. Bush contributed to this mess by not nominating anybody to the available Fourth Circuit seats sooner. In addition, the Conrad nomination seems dead on arrival. Conrad has three strikes against him. First, he is up for a seat that the Dems feel Helms blocked them from filling under Clinton. Second, he is a conservative white Southern male and not a female or a minority. Third, he has written that liberal policies are "drivel".

I would bet on a grand total of 2 CCA confirmations this Fall, maybe three if we're lucky. And BoBo is right: Conrad will almost surely not be among them.

And the ancient feud over this N.C. 4th Circuit seat will go on and on into the 15th year. Zendari offered a great insight yesterday: the one chance to end it would have been for Bush to offer Gregory and Boyle as a package in 2001. Instead he got nothing for something. It might well have worked and ended this seemingly endless impasse. It seems so perfect in retrospect. Too bad.

http://www.uscourts.gov/cfapps/webnovada/CF_FB_301/index.cfm?fuseaction=...

The 5th seats have the highest adjusted filing count of all the emergency vacancies.

Those Fifth Circuit numbers may ultimately help both Elrod and Haynes get confirmed, but I am not so sure about when. I think Elrod will definitely be confirmed this year, but I am much more iffy on Haynes. In general, I think Tinder has a better chance of being confirmed before Haynes because Lugar of Indiana seems to have a special relationship with the Dems. If Southwick, Elrod and Tinder get confirmed, will the Dems allow Haynes to be confirmed as well? I don't know - especially if Keisler is also confirmed. I think Leahy and Reid will want to keep confirmation numbers down in order to appease Nan Aron. I also think the Dems will want to save up some easy confirmations for next year in order to prove their "nonpartisanship".

My predictions for confirmation this Fall: 1. Elrod 2. Tinder (probably) 3. Southwick (hopefully, and seemingly more likely than not). That makes three confirmations a bit more likely than 2. I would be amazed (stunned but delighted) if Keisler gets through. But I still doubt it will happen.

I'm guessing the 5 names mentioned will all be confirmed. The donks don't have the same political position as they did a few months back.

Ultimately, it depends on Conrad. Leahy might give him a hearing, early on, and try to sink him 10-9 like he did for Southwick, using up a lot of time like he did for Southwick.

Between Keisler and Conrad, I think we get one or the other. Keisler is probably the safer shot, mainly due to the court he is being nominated to.

ergo open thread?

Such earth shattering matters could be discussed as: why do reports of Elvis being alive persist, while reports of Castro being dead persist?

Andrew, looks like some gibberish is trying to take over.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/24/AR200708...

"The decision by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on Wednesday to rehear the case of alleged enemy combatant Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri does not bode well for those the Bush administration has detained in the war on terrorism."

"The full court, long a conservative bastion, appears likely to overturn the panel -- and with some justification. The panel's decision was weakest when it argued that Mr. Marri should never have been designated an enemy combatant because he was neither formally affiliated with an army at war with the United States nor captured on a battlefield. That line of thought could have prevented the government from detaining some of the Sept. 11 hijackers before the attacks -- a proposition very few would find acceptable."

I've deleted the spam and blocked the spammer. Sorry about that. I don't understand why they do it.

Isn't the 4th now 5-5? IF so, which Dem would flip?

I'm not the gibberisher! I was just having some mild weekend fun. Obviously, many people wish Elvis were alive and many (esp. Cuban expatriates) wish Castro were dead.

Diana Motz and Roger Gregory voted for al-Marri and against Bush. That leaves Michael Blane, William Traxler and Robert King as Democrats who could side with the liberals. The judge who dissented from Motz's opinion was a Republican who as a district judge is not entitled to participate in the en banc review.

From this blog entry (http://southcarolinaappellatelaw.blogspot.com/2007/07/fourth-circuit-jud...), it appears that Traxler would probably be the Dem-appointed judge most likely to flip. For Motz's three judge panel opinion to be overturned, all of the conservatives on the Fourth Circuit (Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Williams and Shedd) would have to be joined by its two moderates (Traxler and Duncan).

The following is from Senator Johnson's office. Note the graciousness of the senator's press release toward Sen. Thune. Note also the graciousness expressed by Sen. Thune's supportiveness. Now certainly is the time to wish the senator and his family all the best.

Contact: Julianne Fisher, 202-224-1638

Further Details of Johnson Sioux Falls Public Event Scheduled for Tuesday, August 28th
August 23, 2007

**Media Advisory - For Planning Purposes**

Washington, DC—U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) and his wife Barbara will host a “Thank You, South Dakota” celebration at the Sioux Falls Convention Center on Tuesday, August 28th. The Johnson’s three children and five grandchildren will be joining them at the event. The doors will open at 4pm CT with a program to start thereafter.

Speakers confirmed for the program include Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Governor Mike Rounds, Sioux Falls Mayor David Munson, and both Sinte Gleska University President Lionel Bordeaux, and Bishop Andrea DeGroot-Nesdahl will offer prayers. The University of South Dakota’s ROTC will present colors.

Senator John Thune, who has been very supportive during this timeframe, will not be able to attend the event but will provide a taped video greeting. Senator Thune is also expected to be part of Johnson’s official return to his Senate office.

Confirmed guests to this point include Senator George McGovern, Vermillion Mayor Dan Christopherson, Senate Minority Leader Scott Heidepreim, and PUC Commissioner Steve Kolbeck.

The event is open to all South Dakotans as Tim would like to thank them for their patience and support as they welcome him home.

WHO: U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD)

WHAT: The Johnsons host an event to thank South Dakota

WHEN: Doors Open at 4:00pm CT
Program Begins Thereafter
Tuesday, August 28, 2007

WHERE: Sioux Falls Convention Center -- 1211 N. West Avenue, Sioux Falls, SD

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070827/D8R9CF0G1.html

"A senior Justice Department official said that a likely temporary replacement for Gonzales is Solicitor General Paul Clement, who would take over until a permanent replacement is found."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/27/gonzales/index.html

"President Bush likely to nominate Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff to replace Gonzales, senior administration officials tell CNN."

Just think how much access Chuckie can demand before letting the new AG nominee through.

Does anyone think Chertoff would be a tough confirmation fight? My sense of it is that obstructing his nomination would do very little for the D's, but I'm curious to hear other thoughts.

I'm sure it will score at least some points that Chertoff was the only U.S. Attorney who remained in place when Clinton took over in 1992 and that he has so many friends on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Although I think Chertoff will be easily confirmed, that doesn't necessarily mean that it won't be a time-consuming process. The Dems may try to use it to push COA nominations to the side. That might mean only Southwick and Elrod get confirmed this year while Haynes and Tinder's confirmation get delayed until next year. Who knows what it does to Keisler.

If Bush wants to move him somewhere, why not back to the 3rd NJ COA seat?