ConfirmThem

Has there been any word on the SJC meeting today? There were several DOJ appointments and four district judges on the agenda, and I have been unable to tell whether anything came from this session. The information at the SJC website indicates that if a quorum wasn't present by 10:15 AM EST then they would adjourn. I hope they were able to make some progress on these nominees, after all some judges confirmed are a lot better than no judges confirmed.

Looks like four of the district nominees were voted out of committee as well as two executive branch nominees.

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200803/030608a.html

Excuse the Leahy blustering, but it was the only trickle of information I have found.

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2008/03/senate-judiciar.html

"The Senate Judiciary Committee this morning voted out of committee the nominations of Gregory Katsas to head the civil division and Kevin O'Connor to become the next associate attorney general.

O'Connor, the current U.S. attorney in Connecticut, would take over the department's No. 3 position, which is temporarily held by Katsas. In a related matter, the committee also agreed to send the nominations of four district judges and a U.S. marshal to the Senate floor.

The judicial nominees are: Brian Miller for the Eastern District of Arkansas, James Hall for Southern District of Georgia, John Mendez for the Eastern District of California, and Stanley Anderson for the Western District of Tennessee. William Hawe is the U.S. marshal nominee for the Western District of Washington."

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

"An Executive Business Meeting has been scheduled by the Committee on the Judiciary, for Thursday, March 13, 2008, at 10:00 a.m., in the Senate Dirksen Building, Room 226."

"III. Nominations

Catharina Haynes to be United States Circuit Court Judge for the Fifth Circuit

Rebecca Ann Gregory to be United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas"

Or do we think this one's a slam dunk?

Next week the Dems will doubless invoke the one-week delay which will push the Committee vote on Haynes past the Recess and into April. The Pratter hearing will thus be pushed to at least mid-late April. So it goes.

It sounds like Leahy and Cornyn have an understanding regarding Haynes. She will be voted out and confirmed.

an "understanding" with Senate Dems usually works out to something like "We'll let this one through if you agree that five or ten others are dead."

We have known for months that Haynes will be voted out and confirmed. The question is when. As I pointed out in post #6 above and in my "February Judicial Nominee report", Democrats will almost surely delay Haynes' Committee vote until April, so as to further delay Pratter's hearing and all else behind it down the line.

And by the way, it's beginning to look very probable that Leahy and Co. are planning to get through March without even a District Nominee Hearing. None is scheduled for next week and then they go on recess for the rest of March. So much for Leahy's oily claims of comity in his latest Statement on the SJC site. And not a single one of the Republican fools on the Committee even bothers to post a Statement on the Committee site rebutting Leahy's absurd claims. As usual.

McCain needs to start talking about nothing but security, the economy & judges, starting Monday morning, and immediately fire anyone on his staff who brings up anything else.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

The Democrats are killing each other; I get the feeling Hillary wants Obama to lose so she can campaign 4 years later.

Although Outsider might indeed be correct about the Dems pushing Haynes' committee vote and confirmation into April, Reid and Leahy might be so desperate right now to prove that they are not being obstructionist that they will allow her to confirmed before they leave for their two week break at the end of March. She could be voted out of committee next Thursday and then be confirmed by unanimous consent or voice vote the next day, but I agree that this would be an extraordinary circumstance and not likely to happen.

Rather, if Haynes' confirmation follows the same pattern as that of her judicial twin Jennifer Walker Elrod, she will be voted out of committee in the SJC's first businees meeting after the March break (likely to be on Thursday, April 3rd) and confirmed by voice vote two weeks later (likely to be on Thursday, April 17th).

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/849oyc...

"Obama finds himself compelled "to side with Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution--that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world." But no one disputes that the Constitution "must be read," and applied, "in the context of an ever-changing world." The central question of the last several decades is, rather, whether it is legitimate for judges to alter the Constitution's meaning willy-nilly--in particular, whether judges have unconstrained authority to invent new constitutional rights to suit their views of what changing times require. The cliché invoked by Obama of a "living" Constitution disguises the fact that the entrenchment of leftist policy preferences as constitutional rights deprives the political processes of the very adaptability that Breyer and company pretend to favor. As Scalia has put it, "the reality of the matter is that, generally speaking, devotees of The Living Constitution do not seek to facilitate social change but to prevent it.""

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080307/NEWS01/803...

"The accuracy of testimony by Gustavus "Gus'' Puryear IV at his confirmation hearing to be a federal judge is being questioned by four Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee."

"Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, along with Sens. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, Dianne Feinstein of California and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin questioned the testimony Puryear gave last month about the 2004 death of Estelle Richardson."

"All four senators questioned that testimony, citing a letter sent to the committee from Dr. Bruce Levy, Tennessee's chief medical examiner, who conducted the autopsy on Richardson."

"After the February hearing, [Puryear] provided written answers to additional questions about the company's handling of the death of an inmate at a company-run facility in Nashville, potential conflicts of interest he would face as a judge and his membership in the Belle Meade Country Club.

The sometimes-pointed questions and Puryear's responses again raise the stakes in his confirmation. Once thought to be routine, Puryear's nomination is being fought by a coalition of civil rights, labor and other groups spearheaded by the Private Corrections Institute, which opposes prison privatization. Puryear's responses were released Thursday."

"Judiciary Committee spokesman Erica Chabot said the committee would likely not deal with the nomination until April at the earliest because members may want to ask follow-up questions and Congress is out of session the last two weeks of March."

http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/03/06/news/030708dcsenatepanel.tx...

"The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved Brian Miller's nomination as U.S. District Court judge, clearing the way for confirmation by the full Senate.

Miller's confirmation as judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas is expected to be noncontroversial.

An Arkansas Court of Appeals judge, Miller is supported by the state's congressional delegation and by its legal community.

Miller of Helena breezed through a Judiciary Committee hearing Feb. 12, where he did not field a single tough question."

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/06/reid-filibusters-are-like-stabbing...

"Reid and Democrats have pointed to the 72 cloture motions — which cut off debate and require 60 votes — as “filibusters.” Republicans say these are not true filibusters, since many of the motions pass overwhelmingly.

Nonetheless, Reid says Republican contentions that they’ve only forced 65 or so cloture motions proves the point. Here’s the stabbing quote:

“Is it 72; is it 65? It’s like you’re charged with aggravated assault and the complaint says you stabbed somebody 72 times and you say no, it’s 65 times,” Reid said."

"So does this mean Reid admits to stabbing qualified judicial nominees to the federal bench in the back by forcing cloture votes on confirmations? When the Democrats used filibusters in this area in an unprecedented attack on presidential bench selections, they claimed the use of the filibuster as an honorable way to constrain the majority. Reid didn’t make these kind of analogies when the Democrats were in the minority."