The Obama Administration wanted to send a message with the President’s first nomination to a federal court. “There was a real conscious decision to use that first appointment to say, ‘This is a new way of doing things. This is a post-partisan choice,’ ” Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala - via Give Me Something To Read, New Yorker
This article explains in depth the Obama Administrations position on judges. It does little to explain Republican opposition. This is another example of how far to the right the Republican Party has moved.
Shown well here is the fact that the Republicans are still at it - the party of no. This is an extremely long article that needs an edit to shorten it.
Something has to be done to stop this stalling of appointment of judges by both parties over time and now the republicans that have stopped dead the whole process. Americans are due a land of laws and quick trials; how can we have this when the Senate stops new judges from being confirmed. I think the president should make an address to Congress and open the gates to a Constitutional Ammendment to fix this on gonging crisis, as it is a violation of the Constitution in of its self.
In June, Hamilton was approved by the Judiciary Committee on a straight party-line vote, twelve to seven, but his nomination has not yet been brought to the Senate floor. Some ... More »
It seems partisan. The title implies the Federal Judges being nominated are conservative, but implies Conservatives are being obstructionist.
I've always felt selection of Federal Judges are too politicized, but at the same time find it disconcerting many judges seem to push personal and special interest agendas. As a result, the perception of the separation of powers is becoming non-existent at the expense of its citizens is becoming stronger. Too much collusion between attorneys, government lawyers, and judges not to mention promoting an omnipresent and infallible government no matter what the cost is in human misery. ... More »
Retrieving Comments
