Behind the Delays in Confirming Judges

judicial nominations

The remarks by "litigator" are right on the money. Judges should apply the law as the constitution reads, not as they wish it would. This is the reason that appointing originalist jurists is extremly important for the future our nation. The battle over judicial nominations was started in the late '80s when the left came after Bork. It is not likely to end anytime soon. Those who believe the consitiution is a living document are not only wrong, but a danger to America's way of life.

There is, or should not be, a liberal v. conservative analysis as to courts. Either judges follow the law as written, or they don't. Unfortunately, we have seen judical activism, where judges just choose what they think are the best policies, and then just pretend they are part of the constitution, and thereby overruling the people and their elected reps' democraticall enacted statute on the matter. Abortion is the prime obvious example. Overruling Roe v. Wade would be a NEUTRAL decision, as there is not remotely any language in the actual const to support it. Then it would simply go back to the people and their elected reps to decide the issue, where it belongs, and did belong, for about 2 centuries. Roe is the predominant, but certainly not only, example of liberal judicial activism, which is the prevalent form of activism these days, enacting the liberal social agenda by unelected judges acting as dictators, and subverting democracy and the const at the same time. Some fedral judges have ruled that same-sex marriage is part of the const and that the death penalty is unconst, even though the death penalty is specifically contemplated by the fifth and fourteenth amendments.

judicial appointments

Your analysis of the Supreme Court appointments is not completely correct. Clintons two nominees Breyer and Ginsburg ended in changing the balance; Breyer replaced Blackmen, a fellow liberal, but Ginsburg replaced White, a conservative especially in matters concerning abortion and capital punishment.

The Bush appointments just reversed that process. Please tell the truth.

As for pending nominees, if Leahy persists in stalling the Bush judges, and either Democrat wins the election, the GOP should stall with blue slips and fillibusters of their candidates as payback.

judicial appointments

Your analysis of the Supreme Court appointments is not completely correct. Cilntons two nominees Breyer and Ginsburg ended in changing the balance; Breyer replaced Blackmen, a fellow liberal, but Ginsburg replaced White, a conservative especially in matters concerning abortion and capital punishment.

The Bush appointments just reversed that process. Please tell the truth.

As for pending nominees, if Leahy persists in stalling the Bush judges, and either Democrat wins the election, the GOP should stall with blue slips and fillibusters of their candidates as payback.