Conservative courts likely to be Bush legacy
The president's success in getting judicial nominees confirmed gives the federal bench a decided GOP tilt.
By David G. Savage
Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON — After nearly seven years in the White House, President Bush has named 294 judges to the federal courts, giving Republican appointees a solid majority of the seats, including a 60%-to-40% edge over Democrats on the influential U.S. appeals courts.
The rightward shift on the federal bench is likely to prove a lasting legacy of the Bush presidency, since many of these judges -- including his two Supreme Court appointees -- may serve for two more decades.
And despite the Republicans' loss of control of the Senate, 40 of Bush's judges won confirmation this year, more than in the previous three years when Republicans held the majority.
"The progress we have made this year . . . is sometimes lost amid the partisan sniping over a handful of controversial nominations," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, in a year-end statement.
This progress is not altogether welcomed by liberal activists, who have been frustrated in their efforts to block more of Bush's nominees.
"Some of the appeals courts will be quite far to the right for a generation to come. So why is the Senate rushing to confirm as many of these terrible nominees as possible?" asked Simon Heller, a lawyer for the Alliance for Justice, a liberal advocacy group.
(Continued here.)
By David G. Savage
Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON — After nearly seven years in the White House, President Bush has named 294 judges to the federal courts, giving Republican appointees a solid majority of the seats, including a 60%-to-40% edge over Democrats on the influential U.S. appeals courts.
The rightward shift on the federal bench is likely to prove a lasting legacy of the Bush presidency, since many of these judges -- including his two Supreme Court appointees -- may serve for two more decades.
And despite the Republicans' loss of control of the Senate, 40 of Bush's judges won confirmation this year, more than in the previous three years when Republicans held the majority.
"The progress we have made this year . . . is sometimes lost amid the partisan sniping over a handful of controversial nominations," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, in a year-end statement.
This progress is not altogether welcomed by liberal activists, who have been frustrated in their efforts to block more of Bush's nominees.
"Some of the appeals courts will be quite far to the right for a generation to come. So why is the Senate rushing to confirm as many of these terrible nominees as possible?" asked Simon Heller, a lawyer for the Alliance for Justice, a liberal advocacy group.
(Continued here.)
1 Comments:
Good story.
The Bush judges must be looked at in concert with the conservative influence that Bush has installed in various other rule making bodies – SEC, FCC, EPA, etc. (and add in the DOJ which determines which laws will be enforced.) Those agencies represent first line rule interpreters (which the conservative Bush judges will eventually rule if those rule interpretations were correct.) Those rulings will stay on for years after Bush.
At least the judges were reviewed by the Senate’s Judicial Committee … whereas Bush has been able to appoint many of the agency personnel without anyone caring.
And in the end, isn’t it a ruse to complain about “unelected judges” without starting a movement to require judges be elected ? “Unelected judges” that issue rulings that Bush agrees with are A-OK but those that issue rulings in opposition are the scourge of the legal system.
But this information of the number of confirmed judges will not be ban teed about as long as there is 1 judge that doesn’t get his hearing. It may not be the number that is important but the who. It’s hard to believe that the Senate confirmed Leslie Southwick
but at least they have not confirmed Peter Keisler of Guantanamo habeas rights fame.
Post a Comment
<< Home