Monday, September 08, 2003

Political Firestorm

First, I know my comments are broken. So if you have something to say, e-mail me; if you want, I can even copy your thoughts here in a future post.

Okay, many of you know about the Miguel Estrada judicial nomination, the filibuster, the recent withdrawal. If not, you can check out the following:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24547-2003Sep4.html

Okay, so essentially the tone of the nomination process has changed. Before, Presidents needed a simple Senate majority to confirm a federal judge. Senate Democrats just began to filibuster nominees, a tactic which requires 60 votes to overcome (a process called cloture). I wonder why neither side ever tried this before.

And although I haven't read enough on Estrada himself to decide whether he'd make a good federal judge, I think that in general this is a good precedent. (Yes, I said a GOOD precedent). It means that unless some party gains 60 seats in the Senate, all judicial nominees will need to be more measured and moderate from now on. Over-politicized, overactive Supreme Court judges have caused atrocities like the Dred Scott case (to use an example we would all agree on), and a more carefully screened bench can do better in my opinion.

And, as I said above, why didn't anybody think of this before?

No comments: