President Again Seeks to Stack Judiciary with Extremists

President Again Seeks to Stack Judiciary with Extremists

January 3, 2005

Over the Christmas break, President Bush resubmitted 20 judicial nominees whom the Senate previously failed to confirm to the federal bench. The group of extremist, activist nominees is part of the right-wing's broader plan to use the federal courts to undermine laws that protect public health, civil liberties and women's rights.  Half of those Bush renominated never made it out of the Republican-controlled Judiciary Committee. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) expressed disappointment with the President's actions stating, "I would have preferred to have had some time in the 109th Congress to try to cool the climate."

• Bush’s judicial nominees represent extreme and divisive views about law and society. Bush nominee William J. Haynes IV, Pentagon general counsel, has defended torture and was responsible for the legal guidelines for the highly criticized military tribunals planned for Guantanamo Bay. Alabama Attorney General William Pryor, another Bush nominee, considers Roe v. Wade to be "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our nation's history,” and has defended restrictions on abortion even when they are designed to protect the health of pregnant women. Bush nominee Justice Janice Rodgers Brown has attacked Social Security and stated, "Today's senior citizens blithely cannibalize their grandchildren because they have a right to get as much ‘free’ stuff as the political system will permit them to extract."
  
  
• President Bush has had more judges confirmed than Reagan, Clinton, or his father. The last Congress approved 204 judicial nominees and reduced the court vacancy rate to its lowest level in 15 years. Far from being unfairly blocked President Bush’s, “Extreme 20” were blocked for solely to protect the integrity of our federal courts. When Bush puts forward moderate judges, they are confirmed.
  
  
• The Senate should maintain its opposition to extremist judges who threaten mainstream judicial values. Senators have a constitutional duty to review the president’s nominees, and if necessary, they are entitled to exercise all available means to ensure that nominees are in the judicial mainstream. This includes using a filibuster—a time-honored device by which the Senate ensures respect for minority views.

Daily Talking Points is a product of the American Progress Action Fund.