Contributors

  • Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Practitioners Say FCC Unlikely to Undergo Major Policy Shift with New Chief | Main | The Morning Wrap »

March 22, 2013

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d94869e2017d42347f3e970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference After Two-Year Fight, White House Withdraws Halligan for D.C. Circuit:

Comments

Peter

Robert Bork is a poor example to bring up. He was given a vote on the floor of the US Senate, despite failing to muster a majority in the Senate Judiciary Committee. He was not filibustered. Halligan was not given a floor vote, she was filibustered, even though she did command a majority in the Committee.

gene

Here's a good idea if Republicans really do want to get back into America's good graces: STOP ACTING LIKE SCUMBAGS.

Pancho

Democratic Senators opposed the nomination, noting Estrada's lack of any prior judicial experience at the local, state, or federal level. Estrada had never been an academic, so there was no record of his writing by which the Senate could review his record.

In his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he claimed he had never thought about Roe v. Wade even while serving as a Supreme Court clerk at a time when the first Bush Administration had asked the Court to reconsider it. Also while as Justice Kennedy's clerk, he interviewed potential candidates for the clerkship. In an article published in The Nation magazine Jack Newfield alleged that Estrada had disqualified candidates who were too liberal. When questioned about this by Sen. Charles Schumer at the confirmation hearing, Estrada changed his recollection of the incident during his testimony. Democratic Senators also objected to the refusal by the Office of the Solicitor General to release samples of Estrada's writings while employed there, although such a release of confidential documents would have been precedent-setting.

Minority Leader Tom Daschle was quoted by the Associated Press as saying, "The stumbling block to Miguel Estrada's nomination all along was the administration's refusal to allow him to complete his job application and provide the Senate with the basic information it needed to evaluate and vote on his nomination." When Bush nominated Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court, Republican senators were rebuffed in their request for her writing and consequently blocked her appointment.

Even Alberto Gonzales didn't change his story during the Civil Rights Section hearings. He merely said he couldn't remember hardly anything he done in the previous few years.

Rick

"Rick, I wouldn't count on too many Democrats ever to have the stomach - or antipatriotism - to give tit for tat if and when the White House goes to the Republicans. Not everyone is that spoiled ... or even wants to be".

Yeah, but you can't just forgive and forget, or let bygones be bygones if President Obama completes his 2 terms with no DC Circuit Court confirmations...This would be too egregious to go unpunished...Let's say the GOP wins the 2016 election, the Democrats would be guilty of political malpractice if they would not retaliate if Obama doesn't achieve any confirmations to the DC Circuit...

Gary M. Piwonka

Par for the fraudulent course!

Avon

I'm feeling crushed. At least the President did continue to insist that he'd try to get it done, and presumably the surrender was Halligan's own idea. (And, not a stupid one; it must be career-freezing and emotionally exhausting to live in limbo indefinitely.)

The GOP has just gotten spoiled: they wanted insane wars, and got 'em; they wanted fiscal idiocy producing 8 years of deficits and a Great Recession, and got 'em; they wanted to terminate civil liberties, and did.

So I'm not that surprised that they now want their "advice and consent" to take the form of dictating "views on gun rights, abortion and the war on terror" to every Federal judge.

Rick, I wouldn't count on too many Democrats ever to have the stomach - or antipatriotism - to give tit for tat if and when the White House goes to the Republicans. Not everyone is that spoiled ... or even wants to be.

Ronnie Wild

Rick ..... agreed !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gary M. Piwonka

My previous comment was a bit off the point, but is very intertwined.

Gary M. Piwonka

What is incredible to me is the atrocious influence special interest groups have in the "good ole," USA, which a majority of the population is ignorant of, mainly, in my opinion, due to mainstream media. We have burnt our Constitution, have done away with due process, and have become a nation of sheeple, and follow the road of least resistance, which we shall all pay for in the near future.
Having said that, it is not only on a national level, but this corruption has trickled down to local governments and municipalities, of which I have experienced personally. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Gary M. Piwonka

Philip R.Tripp

Activist Judges have no place in our Government. Any Judges' sworn duty is to enforce the law in a Constitutional manner, not to set law, interpret law, or make law, so help them God.

Howard Klein

Yeah, Rick. A "judicial 9/11." Just like what the Dems did to Bush nominee Miguel Estrada, who was far more qualified than Halligan. (And need I mention Robert Bork?)

Rick

Although i hope to never see another Republican president, i would look foward to much deserved payback for the Caitlin Halligan travesty..

What happened to that outstanding and moderate nominee amounts to a judicial 9/11..

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad

Advertisements