Senate Okays Another Bush Judge for Federal Bench -- Will There Be More?
by Jody Brown and Bill Fancher
June 9, 2005
(AgapePress) - Two down, one to go -- or will there be more? That could very well be the question on Capitol Hill after Janice Rogers Brown was confirmed to the federal bench on Wednesday. Brown was the second of President Bush's judicial nominees to be given an up-or-down vote before the full Senate after the bipartisan "compromise" in May intended to bring an end to filibustering against nominees.Brown's confirmation to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit came on a 56-43 vote, with one lone Democrat -- Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- voting for the California judge. Her confirmation was preceded last week by that of Texas judge Priscilla Owen to the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals -- and could be followed as early as this week by a vote on William Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit. Supporters of the president's desire to place strict constructionists on the federal bench are calling for similar treatment of Pryor and others to follow.
"The Senate has set a standard for fairness with Janice Rogers Brown, and we expect the same for the remaining judicial nominees," says Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. "The courts are in distress and we need to make sure that qualified jurists are receiving a fair deal."
That could include nominees Richard Griffin and David McKeague -- both of whom were nominated more than three-and-a-half years ago but have fallen victim to the Democrat-led filibuster of Bush's conservative nominees. By comparison, Pryor has had a short wait: it has been a mere 791 days since he was first nominated.
Brown, who Perkins describes as a "wonderful role model to our youth," waited nearly two years for her confirmation. The chief counsel for Concerned Women for America says Brown deserves to be on the federal bench -- "not because she is a woman and a member of a racial minority," says Jan LaRue, "but because she is an exemplary judge."
LaRue continues, saying Brown's rulings as a member of the California Supreme Court "prove her belief in the written Constitution and her duty as a judge to uphold and apply the laws enacted by the legislative branch -- despite her personal preferences." Describing Brown as an "extremely qualified judge," LaRue says she is pleased that "common sense" prevailed with her confirmation vote.
Unsettled Issue
While the mainstream media applauded the "compromise" achieved by a coalition of seven Republican and seven Democratic senators -- an agreement that effectively suspended the filibuster against Owen, Brown, and Pryor; but left it as an option for upcoming nominees -- one conservative analyst says nothing has been settled.
Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation says the deal, which supposedly ended the unprecedented filibuster of judicial nominees, did not really settle the issue. He feels it is critical the issue be settled soon.
"We need this settled before there is a resignation on the Supreme Court because otherwise it will affect the kind of nominee that Bush sends up," he says.
He explains just how the filibuster will control which kind of nominee the president sends to the Senate. "If he has 51 votes to consider, we will get a superb nominee -- I believe that in my heart," Weyrich says. "But if he has to think of somebody who will get 60 votes, you've got an entirely different calculation."
Observers feel a resignation from the high court could come at any time -- perhaps even before the end of this court session, which adjourns at the end of June. It has been suggested that Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who has battling thyroid cancer since last fall, may step down, opening the door for President Bush to make his first appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court.
