Thursday, May 30, 2013

The G.O.P.’s Court-Shrinking Plan


On Wed., May 29, 2013, NPR morning edition commented on Republican Senator's Grassley's attempt to decrease the size of the DC court of appeals, and increase the number on some other courts. Grassley claimed this court has fewer cases to decide than some others. NPR did mention that Grassley's measurements do not take into account that this court tends to get more complicated cases.

As NPR said, currently this court is split evenly between the party of the presidents who chose them: four Democrats, four Republicans. [According to a post by Robert Reich on Facebook, there are only 3 chosen by Democratic presidents, and there are 3 vacancies.] NPR didn't say it, but the change Grassley wants would put the conservative judges in the majority. NPR also didn't mention the fact that this court has already been blocking much of President Obama's agenda because of the six senior ("retired") judges who still regularly hear cases. Five of these were appointed by a Republican president. [This was reported by the New York Times print edition on May 28, 2013.]


http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/30/the-g-o-p-s-court-shrinking-plan/

May 30, 2013
By DAVID FIRESTONE

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has vowed to crack down on Republican filibusters several times with no effect, so it’s hard not to feel dubious about his latest threat to change Senate rules if Republicans continue to block President Obama’s nominations. He claims he is considering eliminating the 60-vote threshold to approve judicial and executive nominees.

But if nothing else, Mr. Reid is at least using his power to call attention to an unprecedented attempt by a Senate minority to prevent a president from making appointments on three levels: cabinet departments, federal agencies and the courts.

Republicans have already filibustered two cabinet-level appointments, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and C.I.A. director John Brennan. They made Treasury Secretary Jack Lew answer 444 questions, more than the previous seven nominees for the job combined, and have come up with 1,000 questions for the nominee to run the Environmental Protection Agency, Gina McCarthy. (“One thousand questions is beyond the point of absurdity,” Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute told the Boston Globe.) Thomas Perez, the choice for Labor secretary, is also being held up. [The American Enterprise Institute is a conservative organization, but obviously have more integrity than many Republicans in Congress.]

They are trying to disable two agencies they hate, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the National Labor Relations Board, by refusing to allow confirmation votes on any nominees to run them.

And now they are angry that Mr. Obama is daring to nominate three judges to long-open seats on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, where one seat has been empty since 2005. Senators Mitch McConnell and Charles Grassley have accused the White House of “court-packing,” apparently hoping the public no long remembers the real meaning of that term. (It refers to F.D.R.’s attempt to add more seats to the Supreme Court to get the rulings he wanted. It has nothing to do with filling existing vacancies.)

It’s Mr. Grassley, in fact, who wants to pull an F.D.R. in reverse, talking openly about shrinking the D.C. Circuit so that Republican-appointed judges can remain in the majority there. The circuit court has overruled the Obama administration on several important regulatory issues, and Republicans want it to continue doing so.

Democrats, of course, want to counterbalance those Republican appointees so that they can begin winning a few of those cases.

Democrats, of course, want to counterbalance those Republican appointees so that they can begin winning a few of those cases. That may infuriate conservatives, but here’s the thing: Mr. Obama won the election. He has not only the right but the obligation to fill those seats, and unless he nominates criminals or slipshod judges, they are supposed to be confirmed by the Senate.

-----

No comments:

Post a Comment