Tuesday September 10, 2002    |   wildcat.arizona.edu   |   online since 1994
UA News
Sports
     ·Football
Opinions
Features
GoWild
Police Beat
CatCalls
Comics
Crossword
Classifieds

THE WILDCAT
Write a letter to the Editor

Contact the Daily Wildcat staff

Search the Wildcat archives

Browse the Wildcat archives

Advertise in the Wildcat

Print Edition Delivery and Subscription Info

Send feedback to the web designers


UA STUDENT MEDIA
Arizona Student Media info

TV3 - student TV

KAMP - student radio

Daily Wildcat staff alumni


UA News
Democrats hold courts in crisis

Photo
Jason Baran
By Jason Baran
Arizona Daily Wildcat
Tuesday September 10, 2002

Democrats in the Senate returned from break last week and went straight to work on jamming up the federal courts. Senator Patrick Leahy led the Democrats in rejecting another appointment to the long-strained federal bench.

In a 10-9 party-line vote, the Democrats declined to forward the appointment of Judge Priscilla Owens to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Owens spent eight years on the Texas Supreme Court and reportedly was recommended as "highly qualified" for the post by the American Bar Association.

This is not to say that she's squeaky clean. White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, a colleague on the Texas court, has clashed with her in the past, but nonetheless supported her placement on the appeals court. Few people in important jobs are without controversy, particularly when someone is trying to cause trouble.

Though she has been criticized for some of her opinions, the decision is clearly not a matter of competency. Rather, Democrats in the Judiciary Committee are trying to punish President George W. Bush for making appointments that aren't way out in left field. The stunning fact isn't that she was recommended to the whole Senate, nor is it that the matter wasn't forwarded without recommendation.

More shocking than the Judiciary Committee's failure to approve an apparently qualified judge is its failure to move on appointments to over fifty vacancies in the federal courts. The Bush administration has done its part to get the court system running at capacity. Bush has sent his list of names to the Senate. Nearly two years have passed since the Democrats took control of the Senate with the ultimate in non-mandates, and approximately fifty judges have yet to have hearings.

To be sure, these judgeships are far too important to confirm out of hand. Obviously, much is at stake as these judges are to make decisions in cases that could potentially end up before the Supreme Court. This is to say nothing of the fact that the judges on the federal bench, particularly the appeals courts, are generally considered the candidate pool for future seats on the high court. It would be unwise to merely rubber-stamp appointees to such important positions. However, stalling the vetting process and preventing qualified judges from even being heard is equally egregious and irresponsible.

That the Democrats are withholding hearings on judges is appalling. If nothing else, hearings should be held to weed out those candidates, if there are any, who are legitimately unqualified. Those who are qualified should be sent to the full Senate for confirmation. The Democrats need to forget about litmus test games and help President Bush fill the courts with competent judges.

The federal judiciary is the fulcrum on which the executive and legislative branches balance. It is imperative that the courts be fully staffed so they can go about the business of maintaining the delicate balance of powers that is the American system. The courts' job is difficult enough without being impeded by ten Senators who stumbled upon their position of power. In all the talk of a lack of mandate for the president, the fact that Democrats didn't earn their majority seems to have been lost. Democrats are on their high horse because a senator switched parties. But don't forget, the Democrats didn't pick up the seat. He went independent. What a bold statement of support for the Democrats! So there they sit in on the Hill, the Roadblock Ten, doing everything ÷ or nothing as it is ÷ in their usurped power to bottleneck the courts.

New York Senator Charlie Schumer tried to justify the committee's action ÷ and inaction ÷ by insisting that Democrats would not be "steam rolled" by the administration. A longtime liberal politician, Schumer plays the victim role with the skill of a classically trained thespian. This time, his efforts are misguided because he and his colleagues are the gatekeepers on the path to the courts.

One looks out upon the many vacant seats in the federal judiciary and the names of the nominees sitting on Senator Leahy's desk, and one wonders if they realize just who it is that's getting steam rolled.

spacer
spacer
divider
UA NEWS | SPORTS | FEATURES | OPINIONS | COMICS
CLASSIFIEDS | ARCHIVES | CONTACT US | SEARCH


Webmaster - webmaster@wildcat.arizona.edu
© Copyright 2002 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media