Every left wing judicial activist is wetting his pants right now thinking about how the logjam of judicial appointments, largely constructed by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), is about to be broken. The long list of President Bush’s nominations, which Schumer held up because the nominees were NOT left wing judicial activists, is about to be swept aside. Now there are unlikely to be nominees who aren’t be vetted by Schumer, the ACLU, the National Lawyers Guild and even CAIR.
If it weren’t such an outright lie it would be funny to hear statements like these:
Democrats and allied advocacy groups expect President-elect Barack Obama to put a progressive stamp on the federal judiciary, saying it has veered too far right under President Bush.
For those with short memories lets reexamine how President Bush tried to be bipartisan from the outset of his administration and had his efforts thrown back in his face by Schumer, Leahy and every other democrat in the Congress.
…on May 9, 2001, President Bush held an event in the East Room to introduce to the country and to the Senate his first 11 nominees to the federal bench. He invited leaders from both parties. I distinctly remember seeing Senator Leahy — then chairman of the Judiciary Committee — in the room. There were a record number of judicial vacancies, including numerous judicial emergencies designated by the non-partisan Administrative Office of the U.S. courts, and President Bush had moved with record speed to get a slate of nominees up to the Senate.
The president presented a slate of well-qualified, mainstream nominees. The slate was racially diverse. It included a mix of men and women. And, perhaps most importantly, it included both Republicans and Democrats. People forget this, but two of the original eleven were judges originally nominated by President Clinton: Roger Gregory and Barrington Parker. In the case of Judge Gregory, it was the first time in history that a president had re-nominated a failed circuit-court nominee originally nominated by his predecessor from the other political party. This was unprecedented and highly significant, and it was intended to send a message. It was an olive branch. The president highlighted it in his speech that day, asking the Senate to move beyond the bitterness of the past in the judicial wars and to start afresh in a spirit of cooperation and good faith.
The Democrats took the olive branch the president extended and slapped him in the face with it. They immediately held hearings for, and confirmed, the two Democrats among the nominees and then held up the rest, refusing even to hold hearings for a long time on most of them. They then complained incessantly (and, for the most part, falsely) about not having been adequately consulted by the White House with regard to these nominations. And they executed the play suggested by Professor Tribe, Marcia Greenberger, and others at a Democratic strategy session on how to block Bush judicial nominations — a session held before the president had even taken office — when they scheduled hearings under Senator Schumer to try to legitimize the notion that judicial nominations could be blocked on ideological, rather than competence grounds.
Now that the most radically left wing president in history has been elected you can be assured that his nominees, no matter how radical, will have no difficulty passing Chucky Schumer’s litmus test.
Hat Tip: Gateway Pundit