-Caveat Lector- <http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/17/opinion/17LEWI.html?pagewanted=print> March 17, 2001 Mandate of Heaven? By ANTHONY LEWIS A president who lost the popular vote, and needed the Supreme Court's help to win the electoral vote, is acting as if he had a popular mandate for radical change. That is the striking thing, so far, about George W. Bush's presidency. Mr. Bush has turned government policy sharply to the right on one issue after another. Canceling safety rules against repetitive stress injury, preparing to sign a bankruptcy bill that President Clinton vetoed, abandoning his own pledge to control emissions of carbon dioxide: on all these he has heeded the cry of corporate lobbyists. Now the administration is preparing to deliver on what is the core interest of many ideological conservatives: judicial appointments. A report by Neil A. Lewis in The New York Times the other day said that more than 50 candidates for federal judgeships have already been interviewed. A screening committee of 15 White House and Justice Department officials is headed by the White House counsel, Alberto R. Gonzales. Its members are interviewing prospective appointees in the evening: an indication of the exceptional push to get appointments made soon. There are about 100 vacancies on the federal courts among the 862 authorized judgeships. President Clinton made nominations for many of them, but the Republican-controlled Senate did not act on them. Conservatives are especially eager to fill seats on the 12 United States Courts of Appeals. Because the Supreme Court can handle only a limited number of cases, these intermediate appellate courts do the largest part of legal interpretation in the federal system. Most of them already have a majority of judges appointed by Republican presidents. The screening committee has a strongly conservative cast. It includes members of the conservative Federalist Society and several who worked for Kenneth Starr, who as an independent counsel pursued President Clinton fruitlessly in the Whitewater investigation and then sought his impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky episode. Moreover, the Bush people have decided to end the role of an American Bar Association committee in rating the qualifications of prospective judicial nominees. The far right has objected to the A.B.A. role. The whole idea of ideology as a touchstone of judicial appointments makes me uncomfortable. I think longingly of the days when judges like Learned Hand and Benjamin N. Cardozo were appointed because of their stature, without regard to politics. I do not think that the Bush appointment process will inevitably focus on ideology exclusively. The officials involved care about the federal courts and will want judges who can do the job. But it is a fact that conservatives have lately made ideology a much more significant factor in federal judicial appointments. Forces of the far right held up Clinton nominations in the Senate Judiciary Committee for years in some cases, without even giving the nominees a hearing. Given that reality, and the evident determination of the Bush administration to put its people on the bench fast, what should Democratic senators do? Some people, angered by the Supreme Court's election of Mr. Bush, have urged the Democrats to try to keep him from filling any judicial vacancies. But that seems to me a foolish notion, especially if you want to depoliticize the process. The right answer, I think, is to subject every nomination to real scrutiny on the merits. That means the Democrats have to get serious. Their members on the Judiciary Committee, and their staffs, have to do hard work on every nominee. If it appears that right-wing ideology is the real basis of a nomination, Democratic senators should be as determined to block it as conservative Republicans were in their harsh treatment of moderate Clinton nominees. They should be prepared to stall such nominations in committee and, if necessary, filibuster them on the floor. The hurried interviews by the Bush scrutineers are what raise concern. It is as if they want to get controversial nominees on the bench before any vacancy occurs in the Senate that could give the Democrats control. It is what President John Adams's opponents accused him of doing 200 years ago. In his last months in office, after being defeated for re-election by Thomas Jefferson in 1800, he appointed what the Jeffersonians called midnight judges. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company ================================================================= Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT FROM THE DESK OF: *Michael Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends ================================================================= <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
