ConfirmThem

http://judiciary.senate.gov/meeting_notice.cfm?id=3209

"The Executive Business Meeting scheduled by the Committee on the Judiciary for Thursday, March 13, 2008, at 10:00 a.m., in Room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Building has been postponed subject to the call of the Chair."

This is the meeting where Catharina Haynes was supposed to get a committee vote. I guess Outsider was right - the Dems are doing everything they possibly can to push Haynes' confirmation into late April. I think part of this strategy is not only to delay dealing with Keisler and the Fourth Circuit nominees, but is also designed to delay dealing with Pratter, who has become quite a hot potato in her own right among liberal special-interest groups.

Tomorrow's meeting is postponed because tomorrow morning there will be many votes on the senate floor (with regard to the budget resolution).

I assume the meeting will be held tomorrow afternoon, after the votes. I agree that it is very likely that Haynes will be held over into April.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/reid-white-house-to-discuss-deal-on-...

"The White House and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will make a last-ditch attempt Thursday to resolve an impasse over executive branch nominations, but prospects for reaching an accord appear murky.

Reid wants the White House to help install eight Democratic nominees to federal regulatory agencies and boards in exchange for his support for moving about 40 Republican nominees pending in the Senate. If Reid reaches a deal Thursday with Josh Bolten, the White House chief of staff, he will forgo holding so-called “pro forma” sessions during the upcoming spring recess — a move that Reid has employed in recent recesses to prevent Bush from making appointments without Senate consent.

But looming over the discussions is the nomination of Steven Bradbury to head the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department."

"Despite Thursday’s talks, some Democrats doubted that the White House would budge on the Bradbury nomination.
“They’re like little children,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said."

I am not sure how these negotiations concerning executive nominations will impact judicial nominations. If the Bradbury situation is avoided, Bush may be able to make some recess appointments this spring. Reid has got to know this. Bush could recess appoint Keisler. I doubt he would recess appoint any of the nominees from states with two Democrat senators. He also probably would not recess appoint Rosenstein or Conrad because each already has a government job whose pension could be imperiled. So it looks like the White House has a choice between Bradbury or Keisler. I hope they choose Keisler, but I bet they choose Bradbury.

Since favoring Bradbury over Keisler would be stupid and short-sighted, the White House will probably choose Bradbury. A telling litmus of the degree to which those people care about the Federal appellate judiciary these days.

How sad that one is reduced to agreeing with Leahy's comments about the White House quoted in #3 above.

Why can't the Senate just stall on Bradbury or vote him down? It makes no sense to me (other than for partisan political purposes) to say that one nomination is holding up dozens of others.

Cat Haynes will get a vote very soon as the Dems cannot hold her up much longer. Just before the Spring Recess, the Senate will confirm her along with four other district court nominees. This will keep the heat off them until April.

Pres. Bush finally made a good decision by nominating 2 women for seats in New York. With the exception of Mary Donahue [withdrawn] and Haynes [pending], I believe that the Senate last year confirmed all women nominated to the federal judiciary who were nominated prior to 11/15/07. Perhaps somebody at the White House just took notice. Time to nominate female AUSA's and USA's in states and circuits with female Senators.