At a closed-door luncheon in September with high-dollar Republican donors, President Bush bragged that an election victory would give him an opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice shortly after his inauguration, and perhaps three more high-court vacancies during his second term, according to a report in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine. Gushed one enthusiastic attendee, “Won’t that be amazing? Can you imagine? Four appointments!”
A report from People For the American Way Foundation documents that concerns raised about Bush nominees to the federal appeals courts have been well-founded, as many of those judges now sitting on the bench wrote or joined opinions this year seeking to significantly limit congressional authority, protection of individual rights, and access to justice.
The president elected in November will almost certainly get to name two, three, or even four new Supreme Court justices. With the current Supreme Court closely divided on crucial constitutional issues – a constitutional right to privacy, civil rights enforcement, environmental protection, reproductive rights, separation of church and state, and more – any new justices named by the president and confirmed by the Senate will have an impact on American law and Americans’ lives far beyond the presidential term.
Don't be surprised when this tired and baseless claim rears its ugly head at the GOP convention
At the Republican convention next week and on the Senate floor in September, GOP officials are expected to turn up the volume on their frequently repeated charge that President Bush’s judicial nominees are being unfairly held up by Senate Democrats’ “obstructionism.” Repeating this demonstrably false charge is a cynical campaign tactic for the Bush reelection team, and one that doesn't hold much water after a quick look at the numbers: 198 judges confirmed vs. 10 filibustered.
Learn more about the nomination process at our Bush Nominee Resource Center
Senate Republican leaders plan to stage a series of cloture votes and a Judiciary Committee vote on four controversial judicial nominees on Thursday. People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas said the votes demonstrated GOP leaders’ willingness to run roughshod over Senate rules and traditions in order to satisfy the demands of President Bush’s campaign strategy.
The Senate Judiciary Committee today voted along party lines to advance the controversial nominations of David McKeague and Richard Griffin of Michigan to the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.
Senate Republican leaders failed today in an effort to force a final Senate vote on appeals court nominee William Myers, an underqualified ideologue whose nomination has created intense controversy, including opposition by some environmental protection advocates and Native American organizations who have never before opposed a federal judicial nominee.
Senate Republican leaders have scheduled a July 20 cloture vote on the appeals court nomination of William Myers, whose blatant use of his government position to undermine environmental protections and disregard the rights of Indian tribes has drawn unprecedented opposition and widespread editorial denunciation. People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas said the push to confirm the underqualified ideologue to the federal appeals court reflects Republican leaders’ election-year strategy to manipulate the judicial confirmation process for political gain.