Recess Appointments

[krazen1211]

“Although a President may fill such vacancies through the use of his recess appointment power … the Senate may act to foreclose this option by declining to recess for more than two or three days at a time over a lengthy period. For example, the Senate did not recess intrasession for more than three days at a time for over a year beginning in late 2007.”
 
Elena Kagan

[krazen1211]

“Although a President may fill such vacancies through the use of his recess appointment power … the Senate may act to foreclose this option by declining to recess for more than two or three days at a time over a lengthy period. For example, the Senate did not recess intrasession for more than three days at a time for over a year beginning in late 2007.”
 
Elena Kagan

Krazen,

Have you noticed  I asked what the reaction would be if a Republican President tried this nonsense.  No response from the lefties on the Atlas Forum.  Hmm.

In 2001, there were 4 vacant seats from Michigan on the 6th circuit court of appeals. President Bush had withdrawn the nomination (made by President Clinton) of Carl Levin's relative to 1 of the 4 seats. Levin was upset at this and decided to block any and all nominees to any and all of Michigan's judicial seats for the entirety of Bush's 1st term. At the time they were also filibustering Miguel Estrada because of his race.


It's really amusing whining that they do.

[krazen1211]

“Although a President may fill such vacancies through the use of his recess appointment power … the Senate may act to foreclose this option by declining to recess for more than two or three days at a time over a lengthy period. For example, the Senate did not recess intrasession for more than three days at a time for over a year beginning in late 2007.”
 
Elena Kagan

Krazen,

Have you noticed  I asked what the reaction would be if a Republican President tried this nonsense.  No response from the lefties on the Atlas Forum.  Hmm.

In 2001, there were 4 vacant seats from Michigan on the 6th circuit court of appeals. President Bush had withdrawn the nomination (made by President Clinton) of Carl Levin's relative to 1 of the 4 seats. Levin was upset at this and decided to block any and all nominees to any and all of Michigan's judicial seats for the entirety of Bush's 1st term. At the time they were also filibustering Miguel Estrada because of his race.

I'm reasonably positive that's not why Estrada was filibustered.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The behavior of Senator Levin in the environment that you're describing was entirely uncalled-for and I can't think of anybody other than semi-pro Internet liberals or Democratic power players themselves who would disagree. There. Are you happy?

Memos between Democrats and liberal groups called him "extremely dangerous" due to "because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment.".

Ted Kennedy also said the following.

On Wednesday, Kennedy told his Democratic colleagues, "If we allow a stealth right-winger on this court, we have only ourselves to blame."

"We must filibuster Miguel Estrada's nomination," he told lawmakers at the weekly Democratic policy lunch. "The White House is almost telling us that they plan to nominate him to the Supreme Court. We can't repeat the mistake we made with [Supreme Court Justice] Clarence Thomas."




You can be your own judge on Miguel Estrada.

As far as Carl Levin and his relative, well, Levin got what he wanted. After stonewalling nominations for 7 years of the Bush Presidency, Bush eventually gave up in mid 2008. He withdrew his own guy and gave Helene White (a Democrat who is married to Levin's cousin) 1 of the seats. She was confirmed very quickly.

The signs show stonewalling seems to work.

[krazen1211]

I might add, in a very interesting twist of fate, Miguel Estrada was one of President Bush's first judicial nominees, along with a guy named John Roberts. Here they are pictured together 10 years ago. To that point in time they both had very similar career paths.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-500146_162-710311-13.html


Roberts is of course white and was confirmed by voice vote. He certainly turned out to be very conservative.

[krazen1211]

Memos between Democrats and liberal groups called him "extremely dangerous" due to "because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment.".

Okay, yes, that's problematic, though I trust you understand that the memos said what they said for political reasons--granted, incredibly cynical racial-politics reasons--rather than overt racism on the part of the people who wrote the memo themselves (though, who knows, they may have been overtly racist as well).

Certainly its not overt racism. As it stands of course, the Democrats ended up poisoning the well for future minority judges.

The Senate GOP faced a similar choice in 1997 when a young Hispanic judge named Sonia Sotomayor was nominated to the 2nd circuit by Bill Clinton. The Senate GOP realized that she was 'extremely dangerous' in a similar manner and considered blocking her. About a year later they ended up confirming her, and a decade later she made it to the Supreme Court.

Things would have turned out differently had the GOP done what Ted Kennedy and company did to Miguel Estrada 5 years later.

[krazen1211]

Bush would have put one conservative judge on the bench instead of another and Obama would have put one not-conservative judge on the bench (I'm uncomfortable calling Sotomayor 'progressive' or 'liberal' while, say, Douglas and Brennan are still well within living memory) instead of another?

Something like that. Whether Estrada would have gotten the call or not (and thus got that coveted first Hispanic judge business) is of course speculative.

Sotomayor was quite lucky. Of course, luck is inherently part of the deal in making it to the Supreme Court.