-->
Send via SMS
Send via SMS
Message from Craig S. Burkhardt Republican National Lawyers Association
About RNLA
Find A Lawyer
Practice Areas
Local Contacts
Newsletter
Events and Education
Membership Application
Donate
Become a Sponsor
Photo Gallery
Press
Leadership
Leadership
Home

Links
Members Only
Judicial Confirmation Crisis Blogs RNLA Logo

Welcome to the RNLA's new Blog on the Judicial Confirmation Crisis. We trust that all users will conduct their activities here with the highest degree of professionalism and sensitivity. As a free exchange, both this area and the information contained in it are neither endorsed nor officially sanctioned by RNLA.


Tuesday, November 07, 2006

 

Why Hasn't the GOP Made Judges an Issue in Senate Races?

In an insightful piece on National Review Online, Byron York explores the conspicuously-absent issue of judicial confirmations from this season's close Senate races.

A selection of his more compelling points for better inclusion of federal judicial nominations in Republican campaigns includes:


  • "...the judicial nominations issue also just happens to have given the GOP its greatest success in the last Congress: the confirmations of Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito. And, looking forward, there's no reason to assume that those high-court nominations will be Bush's last; age, illness, and the vagaries of fate might well mean another vacancy in the next two years."
  • "What if Democrats, instead of having 45 votes, had 48 or 49 [during the Samuel Alito confirmation hearings]? They might have been able to throw more roadblocks in Alito's path. If they had 50, things would have been much more difficult. And if they had 51, we would still be investigating the Concerned Alumni of Princeton."

More ominous for the GOP is Mr. York's closing, which highlights the Democrats' plan for judicial confirmations after November 7th:

  • "Sen. Joseph Biden, a senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, was asked on CBS Sunday how Democratic victories would affect peoples' lives -- even if those victories were to mean just more seats in the Senate without outright Democratic control. 'Well, I think one of the things they'll see different if the Senate gap is closed, you'll not see many more right-wing nominees for the Supreme Court,' Biden said. 'I think that will, I think the president will have to go a more moderate route on choices for the Supreme Court, if there are any.'"
  • "If Republicans lose the Senate, or lose even a few seats in the Senate, the president will be significantly weakened on the issue most important to his party's base. And GOP strategists will be asking the question: Why didn't we make a big deal of this when we had the chance?"

The full text of this article is available by clicking the link above.


Comments:
Well, now that the election is over we can clearly see that the GOP's unwillingness to use this issue cost them dearly. Personally, I feel the Burns-Tester, Allen-Webb, and Talent-McCaskill races could've gone the other way if this issue had been used more effectively. A victory in even one of those races and we would've not had a Dem majority in the Senate right now, and with it, Pat Leahy as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
 
Ramesh Pommeru recently made the same analysis in a post-election piece in National Review.

Let's hope we get it right in 2008.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

RNLA Logo

RNLA Home

RNLA Home }