ConfirmThem

I want to thank you and the Committee for Justice for all the hard work you do in order to make sure that Bush's well-qualified judicial nominees are not left stranded by the Senate Democrats. The Dems need to be held accountable for their obstructionism. As the letter states, since none of them are involved in a blue-slip disagreement, there is no reason why Keisler, Conrad, Haynes, Matthews and Pratter should not be given quick hearings, committee votes and floor votes.

If the administration intends to nominate persons for the two Virginia 4th Circuit vacancies, they had better make those nominations within the next week or two at the very latest. Given the current 3 month vetting lag time for CCA nominees, a nomination made today would not be ready for a hearing until mid-May. That is already perilously close to being too late, given the Senate Democrats’ penchant for delay and Leahy’s invocating the Thurmond Rule in June or July. Since the Senate is on recess next week, unless nominations are submitted today or tomorrow, they cannot be made until Feb. 25th at the earliest. There was no point in withdrawing Getchell unless they make nominations from the Warner-Webb list almost immediately. We’re back to asking the perennial question on nominations: What are they waiting for?

Regarding 4th Circuit nominees, I must reluctantly conclude that Conrad’s chances of confirmation are fair at best and Matthews’ chances are negligible. That makes quick nominations from the Webb-Warner list even more imperative. It is almost too late already.

William T. Lawrence, of Indiana, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Indiana, vice John Daniel Tinder, elevated.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080214-8.html

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=3130

District court nominees John A. Mendez of California and Stanley Thomas Anderson of Tennessee have been added to the hearing scheduled next week on the 21st for Catharina Haynes. Maybe this is because the Dems have made the final decision that they will block two of the district court nominees from Tuesday's hearing for four district court nominees (Honaker of Wyoming and Puryear of Tennessee).

That would be a sad development, though not surprising. A substitution of Anderson for Puryear is a direct correlation (Tennessee), and Honacker and Mendez are both in the 9th Circuit. Oh well, at least they're only District Nominees.

I'd be very interested to see your comments on my post #2 concerning 4th Circuit Virginia nominations.

is actually in the 10th circuit I believe. That CA-E district is just swamped with case load right now. Levi left and hears no cases anymore. At least when they take senior they can still pull some of the load. I would guess that is why they stuck it in there for pure need/demand.

Personally, I think Bush's behavior in regards to COA nominees in the 110th Congress has been schizophrenic. There does not appear to be any method to his madness.

First, he attempts to be conciliatory with the new Dem majority in the Senate by withdrawing the nominations of Boyle, Myers, Haynes and Wallace. He even switches Randy Smith's nomination to satisfy Feinstein. Then he changes mood and becomes unnecessarily aggressive by renominating Kethledge and Murphy, knowing full well that Levin and Stabenow had not approved them. Next, he began sending mixed signals again with the noncontroversial nominations of Jennifer Walker Elrod, Catharina Haynes and John Tinder matched with two nominations he knew would raise the ire of the Dems - Conrad and Stone. Then he decides to throw gasoline on the fire with the nominations of Getchell, Matthews, Rosenstein and Smith. Only Pratter's nomination could be considered somewhat conciliatory considering Specter's close ties with Leahy.

I am not sure why Bush would nominate two inoffensive unknown young women (Elrod and Haynes) to the Fifth Circuit and then nominate four much more controversial well-established older men (Conrad, Getchell, Matthews and Rosenstein) to the Fourth Circuit. Why is he picking a fight over the Fourth and not the Fifth? Both are (or, in the case of the Fourth, were) considered bastions of judicial conservatism. There must be plenty of Elrods and Hayneses living in the Fourth Circuit he could've nominated if he really wanted to maintain that circuit's conservatism. Why is Bush so willing to risk losing the Fourth to the Dems after the next election with the nomination of people he certainly knew in advance would raise the Democrats' ire?

Bush's inability to name nominees to the two Virginia COA seats is just a continuation of this Fourth Circuit craziness. Nominating two people off of the Warner/Webb list seems so easy. None of them seem unspeakably liberal, and the White House has had a long time to vet them. Yet, Bush seems conflicted. Is he so wedded to Conrad, Matthews and Rosenstein that he is afraid that the nomination of any two off the Warner/Webb list will prevent the confirmation of his three previously nominated candidates? I don't know.

All that said, I definitely think Bush has potentially ruined the chances of anybody nominated to either of the two Virginia COA seats by waiting so late in the game to make their nomination. By waiting, Bush has allowed Senate procedures and traditions to overcome the process to the detriment of the nominee. With FBI background checks, ABA ratings and the Thurmond Rule, Bush is giving Leahy a perfect excuse for slow-walking and ultimately preventing future confirmations.

With Mark Warner poised to replace John Warner in Virginia, the John Warner/Webb list of COA candidates is bound to change and become more liberal no matter who is elected president in November. If Clinton or Obama win, the potential nominees on the new Warner/Webb list are bound to be a thousand times more liberal than if McCain wins, but the names under McCain are still likely to be more liberal than anybody on the present list under Bush.

Perhaps we'll get lucky and Obama or Clinton will pick Warner as a running mate, making it impossible for him to run for the VA senate seat. Thus, we would have a Senator Gilmore and a President McCain (we can only hope....)

You are right-on regarding Bush's judicial schizophrenia (which is exactly what it is - a lack of order and organization).

BoBo: I agree with just about everything you wrote in #7. There's one other possible explanation for the Bush Administration's seemingly bizarre actions regarding 4th Circuit nominations. Perhaps the White House has simply come to the conclusion (quite reasonable when you think about it) that the Democrat Senate definitely will not confirm ANY nominee to the 4th Circuit this year, whether from the Warner-Webb list or not. Therefore they are just playing politics with the issue, without expectation that any 4th Circuit nomineee will get through anyway. This doesn't absolve their ineptitude last year and in '06, however.

One other thought: since the Democrats are keeping the Senate in pro forma session during the break, doesn't this mean that the Administration can submit nominees today and next week, even though nearly all the Senators are out of town? However, at this point I rather doubt that they are clever enough to take advantage of this.

You're right of course and I was in error. Strange as it may seem, Montana is in the 9th and Wyoming is in the 10th. Poor Montana! Probably has to do with the dates of state admission in the 19th Century, since Montana came in first when there wasn't yet a 10th Circuit. Sometimes it's hard to remember just which states that hideous, gargantuan judicial abomination known as the 9th Circuit sprawls into. Hopefully, by this time next year the 9th Circus won't be just one more abomination in the "ObamaNation".

I think you need to address blue slips and 6th Cir COA nominations. Murphy and Kethledge have been held up for more than 20 months by Levin. It is disgusting.

Levin is up for reelection in '08 and neither the WHCO, nation or MI GOP, nor Senate Minority has lifted a finger to do anything about it.

These men are highly qualified AND deserve much better treatment from our government officials.

Very Truly Yours, RS