ConfirmThem

Wow, Jindal and Southwick the same week, we're on a roll!

The new class of democratic senators is fitting in well with their left-leaning brethren; Casey (D-PA), McCaskill (D-MO), Tester (D-MT) and Webb (D-VA) all voted against cloture. I admit that I'm a little surprised/disappointed at Webb's vote. I think his maverick tendencies were overrated. Baucus (D-MT) also voted no on cloture, giving the dems a clean sweep of Montana. Irritating.

The real surprise votes to me was the double-no from Landrieu (D-LA). I assume she calculated that it was more important to please the base on this vote, but to the extent Kennedy (current treasurer and likely challenger) wants to make an issue of judges this is a vote that may come back to bite her.

I mean the ad practically writes itself: "Leslie Southwick - experienced state court judge . . . ABA rated well-qualified - the "gold standard" . . . volunteered in his 40's for the military and served his country honorably in Iraq . . . Landrieu would have denied him a vote . . . Landrieu - representing the far left fringe, etc, etc."

What am I not seeing here?

Truly a great day in America. In reality this one judge should not have been such a struggle. 2 R Senators with both their support, an overwhelming R 5th CCA, Lott is whip, Dems torpedoed 2 others to this same seat. But whatever, it is done now. Hopefully this new gang is hope for the future. I would encourage all readers to call all Dems who voted for cloture and thank them and remind them that this will help them when there is a Dem president. Andrew maybe you should put Leslie Southwick in the title of this thread instead of 5th Circuit Nominee.

Cloture failed 52-44. Really good day.

... but back on 8-03 I commented under an AndrewHyman story "A Victory for Fairness" an inside scoop that Reid would (against all odds) schedule a vote.

I didn't know that Southwick would prevail, but it's a great day indeed. This man (and so many nominees) deserve better than what they and their families go through to take a pay cut and serve our country on the judiciary.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" - Defoe

They voted no on cloture.

If one of them wins the presidency, should we:

A) Play ball and vote against cloture on their nominees, or

B) Take the high road, despite all of the foolishness the dems have wrought?

I'm getting tired of the games. Judicial nominations shouldn't require this much effort. The president should get his/her person unless there is just a bizzare circumstance. A lot of dems think it should be trench warfare, and our guys are mostly polite wusses.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" - Defoe

and no on the nominee. Now they've said it's fair game for all their nominees to have a 60-vote threshold.

but as others mentioned, it shouldn't have been this hard.

Are the Dems preparing the way for Hillary? Did someone sit down with Feinstein and ask her to count GOP noses?

There might be more to come from the SJC if that is the case.

Oz

Read my most recent story, "GOP Race: My 3rd Runner Up -- Rudy Guiliani" on First Cut Politics

I agree somewhat with bk on this. Clinton on Obama were perhaps thinking that there was the possibly that the cloture vote would fail? I understand that assumes some naiveté on their part--meaning the democratic vote counters did a horrible job. I agree with bk if they voted against cloture just for the sake of voting against it--that was a horrible decision--particularly because their No votes on ultimate confirmation would have had the same value. I guess they are counting on the Gang of __ to uphold the "no filibuster" rule when a democrat gets the White House.

He's run a terrible campaign, the Kossacks have abandoned him en masse for Dodd & Edwards, his book reveals he believes in legislating from the bench, and he allowed himself to be talked out of voting for Roberts.

Krauthammer was wrong; running for POTUS this soon has *lowered* people's opinion of Obama.

As for Hillary, I'm guessing she has such a big lead she figured she'd throw moveon a bone. Nobody'll remember this in a year anyway.

Tester & Webb are disappointing, but this was a case where they could have their cake and eat it too.

And no amnesty quid pro quo! Woo-Hoo! If I may paraphrase the great philosopher David Lee Roth; "We gonna get some leg tonight for sure! Tell us how you do! One break, coming up!"

I don't see any reaction yet on kos, but did see that Bob Kerrey is NOT going to run for Senate in NE, after all.

Wednseday, shmednesday; les' par-tay on the patio!

In an institution of frauds, 'pro life' Casey might be the biggest of them all.

In response to hoosier, we gave them the high road with Ginsberg and Breyer. 11 years later, they shoved it in our face.

I had to go right to a workshop this morning after the Southwick vote, so I had to miss all the excitement. I spent all afternoon waiting to get back to my laptop!

Southwick's confirmation really is wonderful news. I agree with a lot of what has already been written. Mose is absolutely correct in his evaluation of Casey, McCaskill, Tester and Webb. A couple of things immediately come to mind concerning this group. First, will Casey allow Pratter to be confirmed for the Third Circuit? Second, will Webb really let any Bush nominee be confirmed to one of "his" Virginia seats? Third, why is Landrieu shooting herself in the foot by voting against Southwick? After Jindal's win, you'd think she'd have been smarter. Her base in Louisiana is considerably smaller now.

In addition. I was presently surprised by Lieberman. I was sure he would vote against Southwick in order to appease the Dem leadership. Under present conditions, he might have real problems losing his committee assignments if Hillary wins the next election and the Dems get 55 senators.

Now four of the five people Bush nominated on 1/9 (Hardiman, Livingston, Smith and Southwick) have been confirmed. That leaves Keisler. I still say Keisler should be a priority. Bush should recess-appoint him (and ONLY him) this December). That will keep his name front and center in the second session of this Congress. Bush would be wise to make sure that all open COA seats have nominees in January. He should not wait on any opening.

At the moment, assuming Tinder is confirmed in November, Catharina Haynes is the only present nominee who looks like an easy confirmation next year. If she is held over until 2008, I anticipate she will be confirmed in January or February. All the rest look like problems. I previously thought that Pratter might have an easy time of it, but Casey's votes on Southwick shocked me. Hopefully, Arlen will be able to twist his arm.

At the moment, assuming Tinder is confirmed in November, Catharina Haynes is the only present nominee who looks like an easy confirmation next year. If she is held over until 2008, I anticipate she will be confirmed in January or February. All the rest look like problems. I previously thought that Pratter might have an easy time of it, but Casey's votes on Southwick shocked me. Hopefully, Arlen will be able to twist his arm.

Given how things have gone this year, I'm surprised at your level of confidence that a couple more will get in.

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071024/NEWS/71...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SENATE_SOUTHWICK?SITE=AP&SECTION=...

Excellent. We get Southwick confirmed without an Amnesty quid pro qui, apparently. Just a traditional exchange for pork, in the end. This may auger well for the future. I suggest that $10 billion per CCA confirmation would be a bargain. Maybe $15 per 4th Cir. judge and $20 billion for Keisler. Heck, we could get almost all of them confirmed for about the price of S-Chip.

True, the Democrats have proven again and again they can't be reasoned with. But they've shown they can be bought. Given the size of the national debt, this would be a huge bargain. Let's go for it, GOP Senators. You can pick up a few billion in crumbs along the way too.

I have to say after the countless hours we have all debated this nomination, I am disappointed with the response. Where are all the posts. I thought this thread would have 100 by the time I got home. Nope, not even close. Also this had so much lead up in the Senate and then just went away with a wimper there. I was expecting this to be a nasty hard knuckle fight in the wells of the Senate up unitl a few days ago. I wonder what the big change was. Reid was not very fired up during the debate on cloture. Kennedy didnt even vote - nothing like his waving finger pounding fist speech during Roberts, Alito, JRB, Pryor, etc. Hmm. Thoughts?

That's why the posts are few. The judicial nomination process already has way too high of a profile. And Ed Whelan is right: "I suppose that this should be an occasion for celebration, but the campaign against Judge Southwick, including by leading Democratic senators, has been so vicious and dishonest that my primary reaction to the whole process remains one of disgust."

Due to their concentration on other issues like Iraq, immigration, and socialized medicine, I think a lot of conservative voters have become burnt out on the confirmation wars. In general, I think Republican senators became burnt out a lot sooner than the population as a whole did. Since Alito's confirmation, the energy behind the fight for good judges has just evaporated. Certain Dem senators seem a little burnt out on the topic as well. Some like Feinstein may be becoming a little more mellow in anticipation of a Dem presidency in 2009 and don't want the Republicans blocking every new Hillary nominee.

Here is the 'meat', IMO, of the AP article. Agreed that the process currently is "disgusting", but this may well have been a step in the right direction, so I'll gloat over that.

Now we just need DiFi & Kyl to ram thru the Keisler compromise. Oh, yeah, and winning some elections next year might help too. Is there any Repub in NV on the horizon who could knock off Reid one day?

********************************

Democrats who voted for confirmation: Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Feinstein, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., also voted yes.

The nomination tested a fragile agreement in the Senate to block Bush's judicial nominations only in "extraordinary" circumstances. Some Democratic opponents said Southwick's writings, combined with the troubled racial history of the circuit, met this amorphous standard.

Not Feinstein. She has said that she believes Southwick is qualified, is not a racist and deserved an up-or-down vote by the full Senate.

Republicans showered her with rhetorical roses after the vote, calling her "the heroine," "the lady of the day" and "a profile in courage." In fact, Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said he would devote a chapter in a future book on leadership to the senator from California.

Some in Feinstein's own party were furious. Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said she was "incredibly disappointed that a senator from my home state" played such a key role in Southwick's confirmation.

Feinstein, however, wasn't the only Democrat responsible for the confirmation which unfolded in a two-step procedure. The final vote to confirm would not have happened without the initial "yes" votes from Sens. Tom Carper of Delaware, Daniel Inouye of Hawaii and Ken Salazar of Colorado, on the test tally that asked whether to end debate. Support from the three pushed the tally past the 60-vote threshold to advance Southwick to a confirmation vote.

Those three senators then voted against his confirmation.

************************

I don't think he would cross Arlen if push came to shove. He certainly have proven incapable of crossing Harry Reid.

A lot of Senators have publicly said they dread another SCOTUS vacancy.

And many state legislators from deep Red states privately dread Roe/Casey being overturned outright.

http://www.thedeadpelican.com/marysouthwick.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/washington/24cnd-southwick.html?hp

"“It took the courageous action of judges on the Fifth Circuit to carry out the Supreme Court’s desegregation decisions and destroy the vestiges of the Jim Crow era,” Mr. Reid said. “Yet Judge Southwick’s record gives us no reason to hope that he will continue this tradition of delivering justice to the aggrieved.”

But Mr. Reid’s role was more subtle than his statement indicated, according to the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. The newspaper reported today that Mr. Reid, despite his personal opposition, did not work hard to corral other Democrats to vote “no.”

Roll Call said that Senators Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, a conservative Democrat, had worked for weeks rounding up wavering Democrats to support the nominee. In return, the newspaper said, Republicans will help Democrats in negotiations with the White House over spending measures.

Mr. Lott did nothing to discourage that impression. “Good-faith efforts on one side beget good-faith efforts on the other side,” he said in an interview with Roll Call.

But a spokesman for Mr. Reid disputed Roll Call’s suggestion that he had struck a deal. “The fact is that Senator Reid opposed the nominee from the start,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for the senator. Mr. Manley noted that the senator spoke at length against Judge Southwick before the votes today."

"Senator Dianne Feinstein of California was a key Democratic supporter. She provided the deciding vote in the Judiciary Committee, which endorsed Judge Southwick by 10 to 9 in August. The senator called the judge “a qualified, sensitive and circumspect person” and anything but a racist.

But Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, called the confirmation “a slap in the face to African-Americans and people of good will.” Despite Senator Reid’s statement about the judge, Mr. Henderson said Mr. Reid was responsible for allowing the judge to be confirmed.

“The majority leader was in control of this process from the time Southwick’s nomination left the Judiciary Committee,” Mr. Henderson said. He called the vote “one of those inside-the-Beltway Senate deals between Democrats and Republicans in which they sacrificed the interests of some in furtherance of comity between the parties — let’s just be real about this , that’s just what this is.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/washington/24mukasey.html?ref=washingt...

"All 10 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee pressed Michael B. Mukasey, President Bush’s nominee for attorney general, on Tuesday for a clear-cut statement that the interrogation technique known as waterboarding, which simulates drowning and has been used by the C.I.A. against terrorism suspects, is illegal."

"Mr. Leahy has said he would not schedule a vote on the nomination until Mr. Mukasey has responded to all written questions submitted to him since his confirmation hearings. Although Mr. Leahy and other Democrats were critical of Mr. Mukasey for several of his comments last week, including his expressions of support for the White House’s view of its expansive wartime powers, it is still widely expected that he will be confirmed to the Justice Department job."

at Hugh Hewitt.com

Since Reid is now consulting with Mitch McConnell to see what to do next, might I offer a suggestion? How about telling Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy to get off his rear end and move the nomination along of Michael Mukasey to be the next Attorney General? After a long delay, the Judiciary Committee finally held hearings last week. But they haven't held a vote to move his nomination to the floor. They haven't even put the nomination on the docket for future consideration in the Judiciary Committee. Wouldn't you think that the Senate Democrats, the same ones who couldn't wait for Alberto Gonzales to leave, would want someone in there that even ultra-lefty Chuck Schumer esteems?

Which Senator do you think has the most to gain by stalling on the nomination of Mukasey? Which Senator benefits from having a Justice Department in a continued state of transition for the rest of the Bush administration? I'll give you a hint. She's running for president.

The Los Angeles Times has done a nice series of stories looking into the very bizarre fundraising of the Clinton campaign, not only from the donor bundling of Norman Hsu, but into questionable fundraising by minimum wage-earning dishwashers in L.A.'s Chinatown district. If there is any illegalities in the Clinton campaign fundraising, it's going to be up to the next Attorney General to decide whether or not to investigate, prosecute, or hire an outside counsel to look into it. The longer the Bush Justice Department is in disarray, the more the Clinton machine can try and run out the clock.

In the meantime, we'll continue to monitor the Senate to see if Harry Reid has any bright ideas on what to try next. It may be a very slow afternoon.

http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=99473

"But Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, called the vote an "acid test" for the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Such votes are among the most closely watched in the black community, he and others said. Leslie Proll of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund said the vote will be factored prominently into the scorecards that civil rights groups keep on elected officials' voting records.

District of Columbia Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton said many senators owe their elections to black voters, citing Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor as examples.

"Neither of them would be in the Senate today but for a bloc vote from the African-American community. Those are the kind of people that we're looking at," Norton said.

Both of the Arkansas Democrats voted to confirm Southwick."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1007/6542.html

"Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden voted against Southwick, leading some Republicans to suggest that they might face trouble with nominations if they are elected. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) did not vote."

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/southwicks-saga-ends-with-win-for-go...

"The decision by the Democrats to oppose the nominee, particularly that of front-runner Clinton, prompted Republicans to warn that their votes would haunt them along the campaign trail. If one of the Democrats should win the White House in 2008, Republicans warn they would be emboldened to block nominees they oppose, regardless of their qualifications.

“What was Hillary thinking?” Lott said. “If one of them becomes president, heaven forbid, you think we won’t remind them?”"

"“The American people deserve federal judges — regardless of who nominates them — who are dedicated to an even-handed and just application of our laws,” Clinton said.

The liberal wing of the Democratic Party reacted strongly to the vote. The Congressional Black Caucus, which represents 42 black House Democrats from 21 states, lobbied vigorously to derail the nomination and said it was “outraged” by the vote.

“That’s not what Americans voted for when they gave Democrats a majority in the Senate,” said Judith Schaeffer, legal director of the liberal group People for the American Way.

Nan Aaron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, said she “deplores the Senate’s failure to stand up to the Bush administration’s court-packing agenda.”"

Southwick confirmed! and to see I was right about Feinstein and Lieberman. Good on you, Senators. Surprised by Akaka voting yes, and Landrieu (and a few others) voting no.

Funnily enough, Keisler serving as acting AG may actually help him get confirmed, as he's getting rave reviews so far. So I'm more optimistic about his prospects than I've been since the summer. I'd still place it at 50-50 at best, but that's a welcome improvement.

Does anyone think if Frist was running the caucus right now Southwick would be a sitting judge? I would say no. Also does anyone know when Southwick is being sworn in or who is doing it?

Fizz as in champagne fizz. Unlike some others, I see no reason not to celebrate Southwick's confirmation today. Sure, the process was ugly and dismal, but that's the modern Senate so get over it, and this was a victory after all, a great Victory. All here who would rather have lost gloriously please raise your hands. I assure you the Left would have celebrated wildly had Southwick gone down today.

The reason there was no drama was clearly that the requisite deals had been made and the fix was in. But it was a "good fix" this time. That's the only way to win these confirmation battles in a Dem-controlled Senate. If there had been high drama on the Senate Floor today, Southwick would have lost the cloture vote. So let's get real and savor this. Just looking at my printout of the Senate Roll Call vote makes me somewhat ecstatic.

Perhaps there are more such deals to be made, maybe even for Keisler. I was only being mildly facetious in my #15 above. This is the only way it can be done now.

its time to nominate a couple more judges. probably the other VA seat (hopefully from the Warner-Webb list this time) and the PA seat (seemingly Pratter). maybe either one of the RI or CA seats as well, just for the hell of it, even if they don't get confirmed (and I don't think either is impossible with the right nominee, especially since Feinstein has shown her reasonableness. it of course won't be a hardline conservative, but even an Ikuta or a Callahan on the 9th will add some balance) the extra nominees just adds more pressure for the Dems to confirm some of the others. the CA and RI nominees can probably be held till January or March though.

Tinder looks to be confirmation #6 this year, with Haynes the most likely 7th, though Keisler or Conrad could be possibilities as well.

praising those Democrats courageous enough to buck the extremist majority in their party by voting for Judge Southwick (or at least for cloture) by mentioning their names in the body of the post?

that they start cutting commercials in West Virginia, Montana, Louisiana, and possibly even New Jersey (though such an ad's efficacy there is questionable at best), highlighting this vote, as well as in states like Colorado and Virginia where we have open seats that state the likelihood of the Democrat joining the leftists in control of his party like Casey, Webb, and company did.

Southwick: Judge judged by region's history

The U.S. Senate confirmed Jackson lawyer Leslie Southwick to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday.

But, rather than a day of celebration that a good judge was chosen 59-38, the achievement was dimmed by raising anew old hates and unfounded charges.

Rather than looking at Southwick, a jurist whose body of more than 7,000 decisions is noteworthy for fairness, opponents attacked this state and focused on two cases they claimed were biased.

It wasn't Southwick who was judged, but the dark days of our region. As Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., admitted: "Like it or not when he's nominated to the 5th Circuit he's carrying 200 and some odd years ... on his back. That is the issue here."

"If he was up for any other circuit, there would be no hesitancy," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn.

Southwick was supported by Mississippi's U.S. Sens. Thad Cochran and Trent Lott, but it was a Democrat who was instrumental in his getting the nod.

The nomination had been bottled up in the Democrat-majority Judiciary Committee and likely would have died there in August had it not been for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Feinstein broke ranks with her party's purely partisan stalemating of GOP nominations to vote Southwick out of the committee because she believed him qualified.

The two decisions that again were brought up Wednesday included one supporting the rehiring of a white social worker who was fired for using a racial slur and another upholding a decision giving custody of a child to the father instead of her bisexual mother.

Mind you, these were Mississippi Court of Appeals cases, not ones he decided at trial, and ones he didn't even write. But both were used to wrongly smear Southwick as a racist homophobe - a laughably false characterization - in an attempt to add him to the junk heap of obviously "racist" Mississippi judges. Not racist because of their beliefs, but racist because they are from Mississippi and, hence, of course, must be racist.

There, he would have joined Charles Pickering and Michael Wallace, also trashed for the same reasons - never mind that Pickering fought for civil rights and was lauded by Charles Evers, brother of slain civil rights leader Medgar Evers. Said Charles Evers of Pickering: I know his positive record on race relations, civil rights, and equal protection for all ... to portray him as a racist; they sickened me. I've been in the fight. I have the wounds. I know the truth."

The truth is that Southwick, as was Pickering, is fully qualified and should make an excellent federal judge. This should be a day for celebrating - a judge and a region as they are, not what they once might have been.

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071025/OPINION...

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=2999
YESTERDAY:
Panel III:

Joseph N. Laplante to be United States District Judge for the District of New Hampshire

Reed Charles O’Connor to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.

Thomas D. Schroeder to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of North Carolina

Amul R. Thapar to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky

TODAY -- TINDER
There is also an executive meeting today:

III. Nominations

John Daniel Tinder, to be United States Circuit Judge
for the Seventh Circuit

Julie L. Myers, of Kansas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security

Oz

Read my most recent story, "The GOP race: My 2nd runner up -- John McCain" on First Cut Politics

No vote on Tinder today at the Executive Business Meeting. He was held over (it was his first time up). These little senatorial courtesies are really starting to grate. This isn't about Tinder, who will probably be voted out on a voice vote next week. It's just a way of continuing to slow down the process.

it won't take much more of a delay and the clock will have run out on 2007 for Tinder.

http://www.madisonproject.com/drewblog/?p=142

"I swung by a reception last night to celebrate with my conservative friends the confirmation of Judge Leslie Southwick. The judge was there as were several Senators and Southwick made a quick, off the cuff speech. My first thought was, “Here is a man gracious in victory.” He could have taken shots at those who dragged his name through the mud, but he did not. Instead he thanked those who had worked to help his nomination.

And then something odd happened. Senator Diane Feinstein walked into the room to celebrate with us. I admit, we all looked at each other for a moment then one of my friends broke out into applause. We all followed suit. It was a surreal moment that even found me shaking her hand and saying, “Thank you for sticking with this one.” On a nominee that was targeted by the Left, she voted for him in committee, for cloture on his nomination and for him on the floor. She was a perfect 3 for 3. Why? Because she found no reason to stop a highly qualified nominee. She judged him on the merits, not on the personal attacks, and came to the same conclusion as the American Bar Association-Judge Leslie Southwick was worthy of the unanimous “Well Qualified” ranking he received."

That is very moving. Kudos to Senator Feinstein for standing up to the leftist hate-mongers, and sticking to her guns against the far-left vitriol that I know was directed against her. Maybe she will now do the same for Keisler.

Wouldn't be surprised if the Senate Dem. leadership doesn't now try to move her off the Judiciary Committee, so that the Dem. membership will be 'safely' composed of 10 robotic left-wing minions of Neas, Aaron and Soros.

Congratulations again to Judge Southwick, and to Sen. McConnell and Sen. Specter for guiding this nomination through so deftly. It's good to have competent, professional Senate leadership again. Does anyone think that Bungling Bill Frist, the incompetent amateur, could have done it?

Oh, and we shouldn't forget to congratulate Senators Lott and Cochrane, who finally came through big-time at the end.

but a line from Camille Paglia's latest article (page 2 of it) fits. Someone wrote in that he had more respect for Osama than for any of the Democratic Senators. Her response included this gem:

The senators of my party, with a few stellar exceptions like Dianne Feinstein, may be a pack of vain, spineless, poll-puking, strutting peacocks, but they are not mass murderers.

http://judiciary.senate.gov/meeting_notice.cfm?id=3013

Tinder is on the agenda for the next meeting on Thursday, November 1st. He probably will be the last COA nominee confirmed before the Senate adjourns on Friday, November 16th. Although I would love to see Catharina Haynes confirmed before 2008, I think the timing is against it. I don't think it's possible for her to get a hearing and committee vote in the next three weeks, especially since the SJC is still dealing with the Mukasey nomination as AG. In addition, I think Southwick's confirmation has taken the pressure off of the Dems to confirm another 5th Circuit nominee, even if her vacancy is listed as a judicial emergency.

Kent Jordan was confirmed last year on Dec. 8. A November Tinder confirmation still leaves a bit of a window for a very late Nov.- very early Dec. confirmation as well. that's of course not to say it will happen, but it very well may.

That was still a GOP Senate, so the situations are not comparable. Not that that Senate was worth much of anything, failing to confirm Keisler, to mention just one abomination.

Who knows, maybe some deal can be made to accelerate Haynes and get that confirmation out of the way before next year.

DiFi's a tough, crafty old battle-axe who was kicking butt & taking names back when Harry Reid was trying to puzzle out $1000 real-estate scams. She's got connections on top of connections, plus she's free-rolling for the next four years, as she'll be 80 in 2012.

She'd crush Reid like a grape if he tried to move her off Judiciary. Props to her for her Southwick votes. About time a Dem emulated what Hatch did for Breyer (twice).

Was cited by the GA-SC in the Gennarlow Wilson case, voiding his sentence.

This certainly belongs in an open thread, but a lot of interesting questions were raised by this decision:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3081047

Obviously, there's many troubling aspects to this case, on both sides. Why Gov. Perdue (or W) didn't just pardon him and put an end to it, I don't know. Had I been on the GASC, I prolly would've written one page saying the legislature very clearly still wanted him jailed when they revised the law and that the original court decisions followed the (idiotic, archaic) law to the letter, and a hundred pages imploring Perdue or Bush to pardon him.

I like the part about how "a second-year law student wouldn't do well" if they had written this opinion for an exam. Kinda like how Roe would've fared in Ruthie's law classes at Rutgers back in the 60's! :)

Happy weekend, everybody.

Here's the Kossack's take on Southwick's confirmation: http://tinyurl.com/25h34a

Couple nuggets of humour; one guy moaning about "judges substituting personal opinion for the law", and another ranting about the "Founding Fathers' intentions"!!! LOL.

Really surprised there wasn't much more; pretty indicative of how special JRB, Pryor & Owen really are. Otherwise, people just don't care about the CCA.

yes, but it was also a lame-duck Republican Senate. given the Dems' attrocious behavior, we couldn't have put it past them to delay until they Leahy could count Jordan in his dishonest lists of "Democrat-confirmed" judges.

and if you don't like that, Harris Hartz was confirmed Dec. 6, 2001 by a Democrat Senate (granted, a slightly less radicalized one, but only just).

The main thing is not so much getting a 7th CCA nominee confirmed this year. The main thing is getting a hearing for that nominee, probably Haynes, and getting her out of SJC before recess. Otherwise Senate Dems will use the delay to prevent any more CCA hearings until mid-Febrary at least. delay delay is the name of their game.

Specifically: Delay in Committee is the name of their game. and of course it should be "February".