Read Taranto's Best of the Web for today to get his take on the Senate battle to confirm Bush's judicial nominees, and the use by the GOP of a 30 hour mini-filibuster to build public awareness of the issue. Let's hope the Republicans use the debate wisely to effectively articulate the case for confirmation of these qualified nominees, and also focus on the Constitutional provisions that call for a simple majority confirmation vote after a vote by the Judiciary Committee and all necessary open debate.
The public needs to understand that these nominees are being denied the process to which they are entitled. I do not understand why the majority in the Senate have waited so long to actually force the Democrats to filibuster, for four days if necessary, as long as it takes to bring more public attention to the unprecedented nature of their obstruction.
Public pressure on those 44 Democrats to explain to their constituents exactly why these distinguished nominees are unfit to receive even an up and down vote of the full Senate, as mandated by the Constitution, is the only thing that will bring this to a close. We need to get four Senators to agree to invoke cloture on debate. That's all. Then they can all go vote their consciences and their principles (or possibly even vote their constituents' will?) in the vote of the full Senate, and be on record as having voted against the nominees, if they choose to do so. Nothing wrong with that.
Here's a link to The Committee For Justice, which provides good information on the nominees, their qualifications, ratings, testimonials, etc. (via The Corner)
UPDATE 11/13: A very well-worded summary on the qualifications of California state Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, and the objections to her by Democrats, by Horace Cooper.
UPDATE 11/13: Senator John Cornyn blows away the Democrats claims of "precedent" on their obstruction of Senate confirmation of judicial nominees.
Posted by dan at November 13, 2003 12:37 AM