Today, a coalition of about 60 organizations – led by the Committee for Justice (CFJ) – delivered a letter to each of the 19 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee "to express our deep concern about the lack of progress in 2007 in reporting judicial nominees . . . out of the Judiciary Committee, and to discuss reasonable expectations for progress on this issue in 2008."

The coalition cites "the remarkably low approval ratings for the 110th Congress" and decries the fact that "a year into the 110th Congress, the Judiciary Committee has held hearings for only four appeals court nominees and has voted on only six. As a result, the full Senate has fallen far short of the confirmation pace necessary to meet the historical average of 17 circuit court confirmations during a president’s final two years in office [with] opposition control of the Senate."

Curt Levey of the Committee for Justice provides a unique perspective on the similarities between the current fight over FISA and the Protect American Act and on the confirmation of President Bush's judicial nominees. Click the link above to visit the CFJ Blog.

Lost in the stories on the Presidential campaigns on February 7 was the fact President Bush gave a major address throwing the gauntlet down to the Democrat Senate to confirm President Bush's nominees. The Senate has been remiss in their duty to vote up or down on President Bush nominees for all positions. Below are excerpts on judges:

As senators confirm these nominees, they also must confirm judges to the federal bench. I've nominated good men and women who will rule by the letter of the law, not the whim of the gavel. I thank the senators on both sides of the aisle -- like Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl and Arlen and Dianne Feinstein and Thad Cochran for helping confirm fine judges like Leslie Southwick.

Unfortunately, some of their colleagues continue to delay votes for 28 of my other nominees. The Senate has sat on these nominations to the Court of Appeals for nearly 600 days. And in some cases, the Senate has imposed a new and extra constitutional standard, where nominees who have the support of the majority of the Senate can be blocked by a minority of obstructionists. As a result, some judgeships can go unfulfilled for years, and justice can be delayed for the American people.

Our courts should render swift decisions. That's what we expect. And so should the United States Senate. Many of my nominees would fill urgent vacancies on courts that are understaffed and overworked. I've sent the Senate three nominees to relieve such a situation on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. Bob Conrad and Steve Matthews and Rod Rosenstein are with us today. These are my nominees. They are accomplished members of the legal community. They will be outstanding members of this court. Yet the Senate has not acted on their nominations. This delay is irresponsible. It undermines the cause of justice. And the United States Senate needs to bring every one of my judicial nominations to the floor for an up or down vote.

Senator McCain stated at C-PAC on 2/7/2008:

They [Clinton and Obama] will appoint to the federal bench judges who are intent on achieving political changes that the American people cannot be convinced to accept through the election of their representatives.

I intend to nominate judges who have proven themselves worthy of our trust that they take as their sole responsibility the enforcement of laws made by the people's elected representatives, judges of the character and quality of Justices Roberts and Alito, judges who can be relied upon to respect the values of the people whose rights, laws and property they are sworn to defend.

Highlights from Senator McCain's response to the Federalist Society request for a statement on his judicial philosophy:

As President, I will nominate judges who understand that their role is to faithfully apply the law as written, not impose their opinions through judicial fiat....This is not a new position. I have long held it. It is reflected in my consistent opposition to the agenda of liberal judicial activists who have usurped the role of state legislatures in such matters as dealing with abortion and the definition of marriage. It is reflected in my longstanding opposition to liberal opinions that have adopted a stance of active hostility toward religion, rather than neutrality. It is reflected in my firm support for the personal rights secured in the Second Amendment.

I believe that shaping the judiciary through the appointment power is one of the most important and solemn responsibilities a President has, and certainly one that has a profound and lasting impact. When I was running for President in 1999, I promised that, in appointing judges, I would not only insist on persons who were faithful to the Constitution, but persons who had a record that demonstrated that fidelity. A President should have confidence in the judicial philosophy of those he is appointing to the bench. That is why I strongly supported John Roberts and Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court and that is why I would seek men and women like them as my judicial appointees.

Things are starting to heat up in the Senate Judiciary Committee at last. Today Ranking Member Specter wrote an editorial appropriately titled "Justice Delayed". A few highlights:

The Senate must confirm nine more circuit court nominees this year to keep pace with President Clinton's confirmations during his final two years in office.

It would be a shame if the preliminary steps the Senate Judiciary Committee took in 2007 were lost in 2008. To date, it has been four months since the committee held a hearing on a circuit court nomination. Several highly qualified candidates have been awaiting hearings for many months, and it is my hope that Chairman Patrick Leahy and I will be able to schedule prompt hearings for all of these fine men and women. At a bare minimum, nominees received from the president in 2007 deserve a committee hearing and a vote before the end of 2008.

While I believe that every nominee deserves a fair vote in committee, one nominee in particular deserves immediate attention.

Former Acting Attorney General Peter Keisler's nomination has been pending for over 580 days without a committee vote -- even though he had a hearing in August 2006. . . .

Judge Robert Conrad, nominated to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, should also be considered expeditiously. The seat to which Judge Conrad is nominated has been vacant for over 13 years, and the nonpartisan Administrative Office of the Courts has declared the vacancy a judicial emergency. . . .

Messrs. Keisler and Conrad represent just two of the many qualified individuals that the president has nominated. All deserve timely consideration by the Judiciary Committee and a vote on the Senate floor.