ConfirmThem

While I'd love to see all of them get out of committee, I wish Specter would focus on Keisler and get him out already. He is the priority, and grouping him with the others (as BoBo has repeatedly pointed out) has done him damage. Get him done, then worry about the others.

tbaugh

Anything happen today? Whatever happened to the "deal" that was supposed to resolve the 6th circuit impasse? No movement on the nominees yet?

(see previous post) .. the meeting was cancelled.

If Frist wants to be seen as getting anything done, he better get this group through.

Although Dave II somewhat disagrees with me, I think that Kethledge and Murphy have been held up because Levin and Stabenow do not want two more Republican judges on the 6th Circuit until AFTER the appeal of the NSA wiretapping case decided by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor has been adjudicated. The Democrats don't want any votes on the 6th Circuit that could go against them in an en banc review.

I just think your theory is unlikely. I think the 8-6 divide on the Sixth will safely see that case through. Besides, Congress may make the case moot by passing the wiretapping bill. I think there's a strong possibility the Senate takes up that bill in the lameduck session.

If the NSA wiretapping case isn't the real reason for the delay, what do you think is? Do you think it just another case of generalized Democrat obstructionism, or do you think that there is a more specific Democrat objective at work here?

Debra Livingston hasn't gotten a hearing yet either. Just routine obstruction. I'm much more interested in Kethledge and Murphy taking their seats, than I am in Livingston, which means the Dems will try and make sure Livingston gets confirmed first.

I think Kethledge and Murphy will get confirmed sometime in 2007, probably later than sooner. But I don't think there is a specific Dem objective other than the plan to just delay every nominee for as long as possible.

Dave has a good point. For anyone who has been watching the judicial war of the 109th, the Republicans missed a chance to smash the obstruction early in 2005 and even without the "nuclear" option they could have forced cloture vote after cloture vote to drive the donks crazy. They were stabbed in the back by Prince John (the only person in DC with a bigger ego than Bill), and now have to wait until a lame-duck session. Fitting. If the 12 races (48 - 40) go the elephant's way maybe the 110th will not run so scared.

I'm not nearly so sanguine as Dave II and some others here are about Kethledge and Murphy's prospects for confirmation. As I wrote yesterday, since Schumer & Co. are wholly devoid of honor or honesty, they cannot be relied on to adhere to any agreement or promise. Once the Michigan District judges covered by the deal are confirmed, I would quite expect the Senate Democrats to suddenly discover "troubling new concerns" etc. (possibly backed by ABA "re-evaluations) and to renege on the deal and obstruct Kethledge and Murphy.

Under no circumstances should the Senate GOP confirm the democrat district nominee (Neff or Maloney) before confirming Kethledge and Murphy. Our basic operating basis for judicial confirmations should always be to expect the worst, take Nothing for granted and to trust no one.

It is time to play hardball. Bush should announce today that in October he will recess appoint all those C. C. nominees that Specter and Frist can't get confirmed. The only exception is Boyle who would be giving up his lifetime pension. Bush must act now to stop delay by both the Dems and the Frist/Specter cabal. Bush can continually recess appoint them for the next 2 and 1/4 years.

I say let's add Kethlidge and Murphy to the 6th Circuit right now so they can possibly sit on the NSA wiretapping case as a panel member or en banc. Let the Michigan District Court nominees hang until the 6th Circuit Court nominees are confirmed by the full Senate. Bush should blame the Freshman Senator from Michigan for the delay and win that seat for the Republicans In November.

The recess appointment procedure, while temporary, is the only weapon Bush has to overcome the endless delays by the Senate. If Bush does not act now, he will have no chance at all during the next two years to have any true conservatives C. C. nominees confirmed. It worked with Pryor, it will work again.

I wouldn't mind seeing a few done, like Gerry Myers and Jim Haynes. Those guys have been hung out to dry for too long.

I think the problem though is that the natural question is why is Bush doing this, and the problem is that he would be doing it in response to Republican obstruction this time, not Democratic. There have not been any Democratic filibusters of Bush's judges since the Gang of 14. That is the problem with the Gang of 14; all it has done is take obstruction out of the public eye.

So I think recess appointments would be a loser politically. Bush and Republicans have failed to draw the battle lines on this in order for it to be properly understood. Frankly, I think Senate leadership is just taking the slack given to it by the White House. I don't think they're pushing, and that's why the Senate isn't pushing. Who knows why? Harriet Miers? Bill Frist? The euphoria and contentment of putting Alito and Roberts on the Court?

People better connected and smarter than me know the answers.

Is that they will only last until January. They last for the duration of the current congress.

Now, assuming that Haynes, Myers, etc are still hanging around in January (or are resent) then at the next recess Bush will have a chance to do that.

However, SO much depends on the election at this point that its hard to judge. We could have anywhere from 57 to 48 GOP Senators given the current polling data. The most likely case is 52, but who really knows.

Neff is the Dem - certainly not Maloney (served in Bush 41 DOJ and was Engler appointee to MI bench).

Remember, too, that an E.D. MI nominee was supposed to have been part of this deal, and as of yet, no nomination has been made to that seat. Perhaps that seat is the insurance policy for the W.D. MI and 6th Cir nominees; i.e., once they're all confirmed, Levin gets his person (widely rumored to be Chris Dingell) nominated.

If a person is recess-appointed in December/January AFTER the official adjournment of the 109th Congress, then his term would end at the end of the first session of the 110th Congress. That is approximately a one year period.

Boyle would lose a federal judicial pension if recess- appointed, Randy Smith would lose a state judicial pension if recess appointed. That leaves Myers, Haynes and Wallace as possible recess appointments. Bush probably would not recess- appoint Haynes because that would antagonize McCain and Graham, a bad strategic move if the next Senate is more Democrat.

I would not mind if either Myers or Wallace is recess-appointed , but I think such an action would greatly increase the difficulty of confirming them later. Because he wasn't mentioned in the original Gang of 14 deal, Wallace seems like a better choice to recess-appoint than Myers.

Judge Widener conditioned his taking senior upon the *confirmation* of his successor. Thus, up until that time, there is no vacancy to appoint Haynes to.

Did the Judiciary Committee report any nominees out?

As for a judge conditioning "taking senior status" or "leaving" upon the confirmation of a successor, that "condition" is exactly what Justice O'Connor did. She did not announce a time certain for retirement. I studied this a little bit, and concluded that her action was unprecedented for a Supreme Court Justice, and that it is a dangerous precedent.

Ramifications and history of contingent retirement <- link

Apparently, Marshall did the same thing. However, when he saw that the battle over Thomas was likely to last a long time he switched from "conditional" to "unconditional."

I'd like to see the evidence that Thurgood Marshall's retirement was in any way conditional from the beginning. The announcment of retirement was a surprize, and the time frame for replacement was only a few months.