Bush's war on the Courts; profound rightward turn of the federal judiciary, SCOTUS in particular

[dajoki]

Bush's Other War: on the Courts
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Friday, November 16, 2007; 12:14 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/11/16/BL2007111600736.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Long after the Iraq war is over -- in other words, a long time from now -- another of President Bush's legacies will still be very much with us: the profound rightward turn of the federal judiciary in general and the Supreme Court in particular.

So last night's 25th anniversary gala for the Federalist Society, complete with a keynote from Bush himself, was an orgy of self-celebration. Membership in (or at least affiliation with) the reactionary legal group is practically a requirement for Bush appointees to the bench or top legal jobs.

And despite Bush's low approval ratings in the general populace -- and even within certain conservative elements -- the president was greeted last night not just with a standing ovation, but with cheers and triumphalist hollering. Bush used his speech last night to pillory Democrats for failing to approve enough of his judicial candidates.

<<snip>>

"'Senate confirmation is part of the Constitution's system of checks and balances. But it was never intended to be a license to ruin the good name that a nominee has worked a lifetime to build,' Bush said. 'Today, good men and women nominated to the federal bench are finding that inside the Beltway, too many interpret "advise and consent" to mean "search and destroy." '

<<snip>>

"While he said he understands Bush's frustration, the White House must shoulder some of the blame, Specter said, noting that Bush ignored five recommendations to fill a vacancy on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals submitted to him by Virginia Sens. Jim Webb, a Democrat, and John Warner, a Republican.

[Gman]

1. As soon as we get 60 in the Senate and control of the WH

the SCOTUS needs to be expanded to at least 11 and maybe 13 with all Democratic appointments to fill the new openings.

FDR did this and it was effective at wiping out the Republican advantage.

[DCKit]

2. From what I understand, FDR considered doing this, may have tried to do this...

But it didn't go anywhere.

They were blocking him at every turn, he threatened them and, eventually, they came to an understanding.

[dajoki]

3. They were threatening...

to strike down many "New Deal" laws as unconstitutional. I think they did get some with a 5-4 vote. When these cases came up the next year they were reinstated, also 5-4. One swing voter switched to the liberal side. FDR called SCOTUS "The Nine Old Men" and had a plan to stack it with younger more liberal judges. However it didn't work but, most of "The Nine Old Men" retired during his terms, so he got to stack it anyway.

Something like that anyway, correct me if I'm wrong.

[DCKit]

4. If you agree with me on Constituional law....

then I'll be your bitch. txt me.

[DCKit]

7. I'm alll for discoourse. You're not going to scare me off by usining big words.

Kep it up and edumacate the masses.

[dajoki]

8. It will take someone...

a lot smarter than me to edumacate the masses. I am neither a lawyer or teacher, just your average joker, with a few opinions, so I have enough trouble trying to keep myself slightly educated. Just when you think you have something figured out, they turn around and make a fool out of you. Besides, I do not think the masses want to be educated, if you know what I mean.

[Gabi Hayes]

5. read these...send money to consortiumnews.com

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2299465

http://www.smmirror.com/MainPages/DisplayArticleDetails.asp?eid=6643

[Gabi Hayes]

6. dupe