ConfirmThem

Smith should be voted out of committee on Thursday, February 8th, during the next SJC business meeting. That would set up a final confirmtion vote at the end of the next week (Feb. 14 to Feb. 16). I bet he will be the last order of Senate business before the recess.

And we'll finally have another voice of sanity in the 9th Circus.

The U.S. Senate confirmed three judges this morning, two by roll call yays and nays, one by voice vote.

Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill, an outstanding judge out of Fresno, CA, was confirmed to the Eastern District of California by a 97-0 vote.

Judge Valerie Baker was confirmed to the Central District of California by a voice vote.

And Judge Kent Frizzell was confirmed to the Northern District of Oklahoma by a 99-0 vote.

I don't have much information about Judge Baker, but I have met Judge Frizzell and he is an honest, hard-working family man with six children at home. Not an easy task!

As for Judge O'Neill, his confirmation was extremely necessary in his district. Judge Oliver Wanger and Senior Judge Anthony Ishii are currently the only judges on the Fresno Division of the Eastern District. They share a caseload of 2,928 active cases. This is an average caseload of 1,464 per judge – which is the highest caseload in the nation. By contrast, the average weighted caseload nationally for a federal district court judge is 524 cases.
[Note, this information came from Senator Feinstein's comments in support of Judge O'Neill's confirmation: http://feinstein.senate.gov/06releases/r-oneill.htm]

Finally, we have judges getting to the floor of the Senate for votes!

***list of votes***
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_110_1.htm

Be very interesting to see how the vote on Smith goes. Should be unanimous, but you never know... Imagine if after all the anguish he loses! Feinstein votes for him, & Johnson is out, but two Repubs are too lazy to show up and he loses 48-49.

Randy Smith is on the SJC agenda for Feb. 8th. A couple of district court nominees are also on the agenda. Smith should be confirmed by the 15th, but most likely will be the last order of business before the President's Day holiday.

ATL has the scoop (h/t SCOTUSblog)

now, I believe Stevens has been rumored to have started, or even completed, hiring for OT08, but note there's no info at all on Souter clerks for next term, and Ginsburg and Breyer only have 1 or 2 (so too Roberts and Alito). Though this information is in all probability incomplete to some degree, its quite possible they may be adopting some clerks.

Scalia's already hiring Sutton and Kavanaugh clerks. Kennedy has two from Doug Ginsburg, so that may be a good sign. A little worrisome that Roberts' two clerks so far are from Carter and Clinton appointees (though I think its been said that Garland is a more moderate judge; don't know about Anderson?)

I think the dearth of info on Souter and Ginsburg clerks is a reflection of the readers of ATL. More often than not they are more conservative, thus have more info on the conservatives on the Court.

At some point in time, JPS will not be a member of the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, I think he's bound and determined not to let Bush choose his replacement. This reminds me of Marshall and Reagan. He held on until Reagan had left the scene and then finally had an accident marred retirement announcement under Bush 41.

As I said in June, it angers me that JPS is hanging on simply because he can. If he's the loyal Republican he claims to be, he should retire at the end of this term. There is no guarantee that another Republican will be the next president. I suspect he wants to model himself after Oliver Wendall Holmes and stay on the Court until his mid 90's.

Despite my feelings today, I don't think clerk hirings are necessarily indicative of a decision to retire.

I don't put much faith in clerk hirings as a sign of impending retirement. While it did turn out to be a correct indicator of O'Connor's retirement, I think in general it is not helpful. For example, Potter Stewart had already hired his slate of clerks when he retired. O'Connor just inherited them.

In fact, perhaps hiring a slate of liberal clerks and trying to force them onto the an incoming justice is just a way of trying to extend his influence. :-)

http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDdjMjM4ODViNDRlMzgxNmE5MTA3Zjk5...

According to the link in the Bench Memos story, Stevens is fighting for the soul of Anthony Kennedy. I hope he loses any power over Kennedy he has had in the past and that Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito win Kennedy over completely.

It's always been wishful thinking to believe that JPS would retire, but there's nothing wrong with that. I hold out little hope that he will retire, but there are interesting tidbits that bubble up from time to time about his pending departure. In October 2006, Human Events ran a story saying he may go at the end of the term. The author of the piece, who's name I don't remember, was quick to point out that he wouldn't publish such a story if it hadn't come from such a credible source. Add to that, around the same time of the Human Events article, a poster at DemocratUnderground said that Stevens had received unpleasant health news and was about to retire. Finally in late November of 2006, Robert Novak's political report devoted a large amount of space to the rumors of a Stevens retirement. He even went so far as to mention replacements being considered. Taken together, it provides some intrigue. Clearly though, the times have passed JPS by and it's only for vanity's sake that he remains. That's just how I feel.

What would be wonderful in the fight for Kennedy's soul is a Justice Estrada. As a former clerk for Kennedy, he may hold sway over the great ceasar, Augustus Kenndey.

funny - and scary - comment about JPS. hopefully Good John and Sam can keep Tony away from Bad John and Co.

finally finished Supreme Conflict last night. agree with everyone else, fantastic job, Jan! I found one of the more interesting nuggets to be the way the selection committee helped bring consensus around to Ginsburg after Bork's flame out, to head off a Kennedy pick. sneaky! also loved the story of how Sam and Martha-Ann met ("Isn't it the greatest?" "I hate it." LOL!). and like others, I came away with a greater respect for Harriet and Al (though I was never one of the reactionaries). Agree with JCG's assessment of Bush's instincts that Miers would have been a solid, if not spectacular, justice, but that she was just a bad nominee who didn't have the time to pass a fluency test. I think she was the female prospect least likely to be swayed by the fishwraps and the cocktail circuit, which is the big concern with most of the females on the list. Batchelder and Corrigan are the other ones I am also pretty certain of in that regard. Surprised Corrigan actually might have been a short-lister for the first vacancy but declined to be considered. And maybe Batchelder's disqualifier will be reassessed if there is a 3rd vacancy, since Vanguard presented a similar, ultimately inconsequential, blip for Alito, though her age works against her (being nominated, but maybe for her being confirmed).

but I disagree with her assertion at the end that this is the most conservative court in 50 years. Surely Rehnquist, White, Scalia, Thomas, and sometimes O'Connor and/or Kennedy was at least slightly more conservative than Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and sometimes Kennedy? we still need another vote.

don't know what the chances of getting one are. no, clerk hiring is not anything like proof, but it is interesting, as is the increasingly shrinking docket, and the rumors prior to the election (and the environment created afterword) and comments by a few senators that seemed to indicate they expected another vacancy. taken all together, they seem to indicate there's at least some chance, though certainly not an overwhelming one. I agree Stevens and Souter don't really want to retire under Bush, but they may. Last year, I was actually leaning toward Souter being more likely than Stevens, and I may be coming back that way. I've never expected Ginsburg to do so.

there's my rambling, book review, and day dreaming of a 3rd vacancy for the day :)

Just an FYI:

Oliver Wendell Holmes was on the Court from the age of 60 to the age of 90. He didn't make it into his mid 90s.

I don't think it can be argued, as you do, that the Court with White was slightly more conservative than the present Court. Not in a million years. White was in general a modest judge who did believe in judicial restraint, but he had a strong liberal streak in him, particularly with regard to criminal cases. He certainly was nowhere near as apparently conservative as are Roberts and Alito. Look at it this way: If Bush had picked a nominee who was "as conservative as Justice White," every conservative from here to Kalamazoo would have been up in arms. White was not, generally speaking, a judicial conservative, though many of his opinions (and those he joined) had a judicially conservative result.

though I am mindful of the comment by some evangelical (can't remember the name off hand) that White was the only true conservative on the Supreme Court in his lifetime. but still, with two moderates (who were then still more conservative than they have come to be) plus White, that strikes me as more conservative in at least some instances than what is still at most 5 conservatives, and with an as yet unproven new duo (though I do not have any real fears about either). now if Good John and Brother Sam can make Kennedy more consistently conservative, I would agree with JCG's assessment without hesitation, but that is yet to be proven.

Bench Memos says the Legal Times says Bush will tap Dabney Friedrich to replace Judge Gladys Kessler.

Supposedly, Souter is always the last J to hire clerks. But nothing could surprise me that he'd do. It would be the ultimate LOL for him to shock all the Dems and retire out of the blue this summer. Payback for all the shocks he's give Repubs over the years.

The Dem Underground bit about "bad health news" did not mention JPS specifically, and was proven to be total GOTV nonsense. Sadly, the "JRB's at the top W's list" is also likely either GOTV, or a sop to the base.

Would anyone here hesitate to replace one of the 4 libs or AMK w/a 50 y.o. White, ahead of Callahan or Mahoney?

I read the DemocratUndergound post and my recollection is that it did mention JPS. In fact, I thought the post specifically asked for prayers for JPS. Asking for prayers on a Democrat website may be ironic, but that is my recollection. As for it being GOTV nonsense, I don't know that it was proven, but it makes sense that it might have been a GOTV motivator for both sides. As for JRB, I totally agree that her name is for base consideration only.

IIRC, the original post said "a SCOTUSJ has received very bad health news and will retire over the XMas break." A lot of the replies immediately assumed JPS, and along w/a couple of prayers, there were a bunch of "sending good vibes/good karma his way" type mush.

Doesn't matter, he strong like bool, and is going nowhere anytime soon. He obv wants Douglas & Holmes' longevity & age records for starters. RBG will have to be carried out under W. Souter's bizarre eccentricities are our only hope.

I'm sure JRB was leaked by some staffer, prompted by Rove. IMO W still might nominate her anyway, tho. He IS stubborn once he makes up his mind on something; see Miers, H.

IIRC, it wasn't so much "prayers" so much as it was "good vibes."

C'est la vie over at DU.

Whacker is right, the DU thread did mention JPS by name. there was another (more reputable) source that same week that mentioned a justice, unnamed, possibly having to step down by the end of the year for health reasons. unlcear as to whether "end of the year" meant AD 2006 or OT 2006, however.