Skip Navigation
Judging the Environment judicial nominations photo
 

A project tracking federal judicial nominations and courts.


Defenders of Wildlife

Editorials and Opinion

 

Issue
Nominee
Publication
Opinion Type
 

 

Items 151 - 180 of 295  Previous12345678910Next

Editorial: Nominees for courts still hang in limbo (Daily Progress [Charlottesville, VA], 11/18/10)
Opinion By The Daily Progress: "the process should be allowed to play out with a vote of the full Senate."

Let's fix judicial nominee process (Politico, 11/18/10)
ABNER J. MIKVA & TIMOTHY LEWIS: "As federal judges appointed by presidents from different parties, we urge the Senate to end the excessive politicization of the confirmation process that is creating these delays. This obstruction and the way it undermines our democratic process would be outrageous at any time. But it is especially shameful now, because many of these qualified nominees received bipartisan support when nominated and were then approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee with broad support. Yet they have waited more than a year to be confirmed because the Senate never put their nomination to a vote."

Senate Could Go Into Weekend to Confirm Administration Nominees (Firedoglake, 11/18/10)
David Dayen: "The federal courts are nearing crisis mode, with a record number of vacancies, and need a fresh batch of judges....In the next Congress, Senate Democrats should really make this a priority....Mind you, it would be better if they cut down on the time needed for post-cloture debate, or the need for multiple cloture votes on confirmations, by changing the rules of the Senate at the beginning of the next Congress, which they can do by majority vote."

Justice (Think Progress, 11/18/10)
"The Senate may need to hold weekend sessions to confirm long-stalled nominees who have previously been blocked by unprecedented GOP obstructionism. The delayed nominees include four “controverisial” judicial nomines who Majority Leader Reid has now indicated he will hold votes on."

Lame-Duck Fights: Confirm OMB's Jack Lew, DOJ's Jim Cole and 23 Federal Judges (Huffington Post, 11/17/10)
Prof. Victor Williams: "For federal justice's sake, Barack Obama must continue to demand immediate floor votes for 23 long-blocked judicial nominees.... The Administration must keep the traditional nomination queue full while Obama regularly uses his bully pulpit to demand Senate confirmation votes. In addition to key executive and regulatory positions, Obama's focus should be on the confirmation fight for federal judges."

Goodwin Liu and Others Still Not Confirmed (Legal Ethics Forum, 11/17/10)
Former GW Bush WH Associate Counsel Richard Painter: "Once again the Senate has been refusing to vote up or down on many of the President’s judicial nominees. ...nominees who should not be controversial, including Goodwin Liu (I have made previous posts here on his nomination), are described as radical activists..Those of us who care about the future of the judiciary should make it clear that the delay must stop. This does not mean the Senators should vote "yes". They can vote "no". But they should vote."

PUTTING NOMINATIONS HIGH ON THE SENATE'S TO-DO LIST (Washington Monthly, 11/16/10)
Steve Benen's column: "Why not use that time to let the Obama administration actually have the staff it needs and start dealing with the vacancy crisis on the federal courts? The latter, in particular, is one of the overlooked scandals of the last two years. ... If I'm Harry Reid, I'm getting ready to make this one of my top priorities in the next Congress."

Editorial: New Congress must confirm judges (Press Telegram [CA], 11/16/10)
Caseloads are so critically high that some vacancies have been declared judicial emergencies. There are 111 vacant judge positions in the federal system. Thirty-eight candidates who have been through the vetting process and have even had a hearing in the Senate are awaiting confirmation.

Is a GOP House Better for Obama Nominees? (Atlantic, 11/15/10)
Chris Good: TPM's Brian Beutler makes a counterintuitive point: now that Republicans control the House, President Obama's nominees might have an easier time making their ways through the Senate. [includes excerpts quoting Glenn Sugameli]

Nomination Fights To Come (Yglesias, 11/15/10)
"[I]t would now make sense to dedicate much more Senate floor time to nominations. Brian Beutler reports that advocates are making the case: [reproduces portion of Beutler analysis quoting Glenn Sugameli]" We’ll see if it happens, but it ought to."

Editorial: Judicial nominees still hanging in limbo (Winston-Salem Journal [NC] , 11/15/10)
"These judges deserve a confirmation vote, up or down, and the federal bench needs reinforcements."

Silver Lining: Why Dems' Big Loss Could Pave The Way For Obama Nominees (Talking Points Memo, 11/15/10)
Brian Beutler: "Reid should concentrate Floor time on must pass bills, message and other votes that highlight differences and important matters that are or should be non-controversial, including confirming lifetime federal judges," Glenn Sugameli, an advocate for swift judicial confirmations, tells TPM. "All of Obama's nominees to circuit and district courts have had the support of their home-state Republican and Democratic senators and the vast majority have been non-controversial nominees who have been approved by the Judiciary Committee without objection and approved unanimously when they finally receive usually long-delayed Floor votes." "If one or more Republican senators force cloture votes on consensus nominees, they will accurately be seen as mindlessly obstructionist," Sugameli says. If they do not, nominees will be confirmed quickly."

A silver lining on judicial confirmations? (Charleston Gazette [WV] , 11/15/10)
Andrew Clevenger: "Beutler suggests that without much legislation coming out of the House to occupy the Senate’s time, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) can schedule votes for pending candidates for federal judgeships and administration posts. [includes excerpts quoting Glenn Sugameli]"

Eagles and many others still wait for Senate votes (Greensboro News & Record [NC], 11/15/10)
Glenn Sugameli published Letter to the Editor: "“With a majority of women, state’s top court hits milestone (editorial, Nov. 10) correctly notes that “the federal bench still seems less welcoming.” The U.S. Senate can help change that during the lame-duck session. Floor votes are pending on 23 judicial nominees, including 10 women, nine of whom were approved by the Judiciary Committee without dissent."

More on the Vacancy Crisis. (American Prospect, 11/15/10)
Jamelle Bouie: "The other possibility, as Brian Beutler notes, is for Democrats to take advantage of Republican obstruction by devoting more time to judicial nominees: ...With gridlock likely in next year's Senate, Democrats have plenty of time to vote on nominees, as opposed to the last two years, where a tough legislative schedule meant that judicial and executive-branch nominees fell by the wayside. If Democrats are smart, they can make a lot of headway toward repairing the lower courts with new judges, and staffing the executive branch."

A lame and spineless duck? (Washington Post, 11/15/10)
E.J. Dionne, Jr. column: "There are a slew of judicial nominations and several executive branch appointments pending. The Senate shouldn't leave town without getting these appointees through."

A Bad Deal for Judicial Nominees (American Prospect, 11/13/10)
Jamelle Bouie: "As of last week, there were 38 judicial nominees approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and waiting for a floor vote. 29 of those nominees left Judiciary without opposition, and at least 3 came with significant bipartisan support. Given the huge number of lower court vacancies and this level of support, it's ridiculous that Reid is poised to accept a deal that confirms half of the nominees."

Judicial diversity (Kentucky Enquirer, 11/11/10)
"Woolner's excellent column does not discuss one key result of this obstruction by Republican senators; it has unjustifiably prolonged the overwhelmingly white male makeup of the federal bench."

Republicans don't do bipartisanship (Daily Kos, 11/11/10)
Laurence Lewis: "The Democrats need to stop buying into a myth that means but their own destruction. They need to use every media opportunity to hammer home the point that they have tried to cooperate and compromise while the Republicans have not and will not. They need to ... appoint and confirm judges, while they can."

What's Good for One Lame Duck Ought to be Good for Another (Huffington Post, 11/11/10)
Judith E. Schaeffer: "During the Senate's "lame duck" session in 2002, the Senate voted on and confirmed 20 of President George W. Bush's judicial nominees, including two highly controversial nominees to the Court of Appeals (Dennis Shedd and Michael McConnell). President Obama's nominees deserve no less consideration now. With more than 100 vacancies on the federal courts, there will be serious consequences to the American justice system if Senate Republicans continue to deny up or down votes to these nominees (or to additional nominees, possibly as many as 16, who may be passed out of the Judiciary Committee before the end of this Congress)."

Judicial diversity (Courier-Journal [KY] , 11/11/10)
Glenn Sugameli published Reader Letter: "one key result of this obstruction by Republican senators; it has unjustifiably prolonged the overwhelmingly white male makeup of the federal bench. The Senate's lame duck session can and should make a difference. The 23 nominees awaiting floor votes include 10 women, nine of whom the Judiciary Committee approved without dissent. President Obama's judicial selection has begun to diversify the federal bench; there are 22 women among his 43 confirmed nominees. In addition, 17 Obama judges are people of color, and another 13 are awaiting floor votes."

Judicial nominees and the midterm election: Now what? (Charleston Gazette [WV] , 11/10/10)
Andrew Clevenger column: "A lot of people, including the Federal Bar Association, would put the more than 100 vacancies in the federal judiciary among the serious problems facing our country. ,,,Bouie really drives home why the growing number of judicial vacancies presents a major problem to the courts, and therefore to average Americans, calling Obama’s neglect of the judicial nomination process “one of the biggest unforced errors of his presidency”"

Republican Activists in Congress Choke Courts: Ann Woolner (Bloomberg News, 11/08/10)
"Pushing the judiciary rightward has been a staple of Republican campaigns for decades. ...Republicans have been loading the federal bench with as many conservatives as they can, while blocking as many Democratic nominees as possible. Yes, I said Democratic nominees instead of liberal. The current list of 23 stalled Obama nominees includes 17 approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee without a whiff of controversy or even a no vote against them. ... So long have so many vacancies languished that court administrators have declared judicial emergencies in 50 courts. When Bush left office, that number stood at 20."

The Vacancy Crisis (American Prospect, 11/08/10)
Jamelle Bouie: "The consequences of an understaffed federal judiciary are hard to overstate. Not only are courts across the country struggling to handle growing dockets, some have stopped hearing civil cases altogether. ...The federal judiciary is one of the few areas where the president can create conditions for broad and long-lasting change. Any president who gains the opportunity to shape the federal judiciary should use it to its fullest. Yes, Obama has had to contend with a hyper-partisan, rejectionist Republican Party, but his neglect of the judicial nomination process is one of the biggest unforced errors of his presidency."

Nominees on hold (Akron Beacon Journal [OH], 11/04/10)
Glenn Sugameli published Letter to the Editor: "Blanket holds by anonymous Senate Republicans have blocked floor votes on Judge Pearson and 22 other judicial nominees the Judiciary Committee has approved. Retiring Sen. Voinovich told CNN that the upcoming lame duck session of Congress should work to demonstrate a commitment to problem-solving rather than partisan bickering. A good place to start would be voting to fill judicial vacancies, which have soared to over 100."

GOP Promises Two More Years of No Compromise (Crooks and Liars blog, 11/01/10)
John Perr: "Thanks to the Republicans' historic use of Filibusters, anonymous holds, and other obstructionist tactics, President Obama's confirmation rate is "falling off a cliff."...To be sure, the Republicans' successful rearguard action is helping to preserve conservative dominance of the federal judiciary. But with its sluggish pace of nominations, the Obama administration isn't helping itself."

Justice Delayed: The Urgent Need to Fill Federal Judicial Vacancies (Daily Journal [CA] , 10/28/10)
Bi-partisan Op-Ed by by William Hebert & Sheldon Sloan: "The Senate needs to act now. We urge the Senate to bring to a vote each of the President's judicial nominees at the earliest possible date in order to secure to our people the right to petition the government to redress grievances and to defend themselves when wrongly and unjustly accused."

19 States Don’t Have Enough Federal Judges to Handle Case Loads (AllGov, 10/25/10)
Noel Brinkerhoff & David Wallechinsky: "Judicial nominees continue to pile up in the U.S. Senate, where Republicans have blocked so many judges from being confirmed that 19 states now have “judicial emergencies” on their hands—meaning cases are backing up as the legal system becomes clogged."

Senate Gridlocked on Judicial Nominations (Inventive Step: A blog dedicated to a discussion of patent law issues & strategies, 10/25/10)
Matt Osenga: "Congress is again causing problems for the Federal Judiciary. The crisis is a lack of judicial resources due to the fact that Congress refuses to confirm Federal judges."