Fighting over judicial nominees again

A couple of weeks ago, the National Review’s Rich Lowry sketched out a seven-point comeback plan for Bush and the GOP. Among the suggestions was for the president to “push for the [tag]confirmation[/tag] of his circuit [tag]judges[/tag] that are pending. Talk about them by name. The [tag]GOP[/tag] wins [tag]judiciary[/tag] fights.”

Apparently, some Republicans in DC decided this was a pretty good idea. James Dobson’s Focus on the Family sent this to its membership yesterday.

Senate Majority Leader [tag]Bill Frist[/tag], R-Tenn., plans to bring two controversial judicial nominees to the floor in May.

A Frist aide said Tuesday that votes will likely be scheduled next month on the long-blocked nominations of U.S. District Judge [tag]Terrence Boyle[/tag] to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and White House aide [tag]Brett Kavanaugh[/tag] to the U.S. Circuit [tag]Court of Appeals[/tag] for the District of Columbia Circuit.

As political strategies go, this is actually pretty sound. The far-right base desperately wants Bush to stack the courts with more conservative ideologues. These fights rally the troops, help with fundraising, and generally work in the GOP’s favor because Dems only have 45 votes, a few of which usually vote with Republicans on fights over judicial nominees.

So, who are Boyle and Kavanaugh? It’s been a while since we dove into this issue, so it’s probably time for a reminder about the cast of characters.

Terrence Boyle has been accurately described as a “right-wing judicial activist who has sought to roll back well-settled precedents and override the express will of Congress.” Boyle is so ideological, even the 4th Circuit, the nation’s most conservative circuit, has admonished Boyle, “repeatedly reversing or criticizing him for subverting basic procedural rules and misconstruing clear legal principles.” Indeed, Boyle has been reversed over 150 times by the 4th Circuit. The man’s record is one of hostility for minorities, the disabled, and women. And soon, Senate Republicans and the Bush White House may pick a fight over whether Boyle deserves a lifetime appointment to the appeals court bench.

Oddly enough, Kavanaugh may be even more controversial.

In January, Bush renominated Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, generally considered the second most important court following the [tag]Supreme Court[/tag]. Dems had blocked Kavanaugh’s nomination once, but Bush wanted to start the fight over again.

[tag]Kavanaugh[/tag] is not exactly a household name, but chances are you know his handiwork.

Kavanaugh was a key member of [tag]Ken Starr[/tag]’s impeachment team and helped lead the investigation of Vince Foster’s suicide. Indeed, Kavanaugh personally wrote the portion of the Starr report that outlined Starr’s reasons for Congress to impeach Clinton in 1998. As Roll Call reported way back in April 2004:

From Starr to Monica Lewinsky to Manuel Miranda — the former GOP staffer at the center of the improperly accessed Democratic memos — Kavanaugh has connections directly or indirectly to a host of scandal figures who have irked Democrats in recent years. […]

While in the counsel’s office Kavanaugh was also at the center of a few other decisions, including one to restrict access to presidential documents traditionally released after 12 years. Democratic staff said this was a bit of legal irony since, while working for Starr, Kavanaugh spent a lot of time and effort trying to unseal documents on which the Clinton administration claimed executive privilege.

His connections to GOP scandals aside, Kavanaugh is still an odd choice for a lifetime spot on the DC Circuit. He has no judicial experience, a fairly limited legal background outside partisan political work (his trial work is practically non-existent), and if confirmed, would be one of the youngest judges in the history of the DC Circuit.

So, what’s Kavanaugh done lately? For the past few years, he’s been helping Bush pick judges like John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Republicans, directionless and nervous, believe fighting over Kavanaugh and [tag]Boyle[/tag] will help get them back on track. Dems have no reason in the world to let these two get confirmed.

Two words: Claude Allen.

  • I suppose back when Bush was popular and considered by ANY as be competent, getting HIS choices for judges on the bench was an appealing argument.

    Now, please, just bring it on. Make the case for having a Democratic majority in the Senate by making it clear that Frist has no regard for the opposition rights and will push totally stupid choices at the behast of the President. What an issue to take to 2006.

    “Once again, the Republicans have broken the rules and norms of the Senate to push contraversal and unqualified candidates on to the Nation’s courts. Bush can only be stopped from packing the courts with incompetents like Harriet Miers if you vote for X for Senate this November!”

  • The Democrats should make Kavanaugh famous. Anything relating to the Starr Inquisition stinks like month-old fish to the American public, and it’s not like his work since then would be particularly well received either.

    These are good fights for the Dems to wage. If they rile up the righty base, so be it.

  • Great … the Republicans set up little pissing matches that they think they can win while they leave important policy matters to rot. With only one in three Americans in favor of the president and only one in four favorable to Congress, do they really think lightning rod nominations are the way to go? One of these days the press will realize that shilling for the Repubs is playing to a smaller demographic audience and critically questioning their moves will help their ratings more.

  • Comments are closed.