News Archives
To Warriors For Truth from
Senator Bill Frist
An arrangement was reached by fourteen of my colleagues. I was not a party to it, and
here's why...
I do not agree with it because it does not get the job done of ensuring fair, up or down
votes on all judicial nominees sent to the Senate by the President.
It is my firm belief that--on principle--all judicial nominees deserve an up or down vote
on the floor of the United States Senate.
The new understanding, if followed in good faith, affirms my principle to some extent. It
marks some break in the partisan obstruction of the past two years, and ensures that seven
outstanding jurists--including Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor--will
get the fair up or down votes they have long deserved.
But it does not grant fairness to all other jurists. It still allows mindless filibusters
to be triggered at the whim of a minority more interested in obstruction than progress.
And that is a shame. So make no mistake, the Constitutional Option remains on the table.
If the minority again acts in bad faith--if they resume their campaign of mindless
judicial obstruction--I will NOT hesitate to call it to a vote. Not for a second.
For too long on judicial nominees, the filibuster was abused to facilitate partisanship,
and subvert principle.
We have exposed the injustice of judicial obstruction in the last Congress, and advanced
the core Constitutional principle that all judicial nominees deserve a fair up or down
vote on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
Priscilla Owen--after four years, two weeks and two days--finally received the fair, up or
down vote she deserved.
And, mark my words, more judges like her will follow in the days ahead. I hope the
minority will respect the will of the majority, and give judges the courtesy, the respect,
of a fair, up or down vote.
Sincerely, Bill Frist
======================================--
Jay Alan Sekulow, Chief Counsel
ACLJ - Voice Your Opinion Click Here
I am sure you do not want Senator Ted Kennedy in charge of the United States Constitution.
I don't intend to turn the Constitution over to him for revisions. But that is what Sen.
Kennedy is trying to do by distorting the Constitution.
Sen. Ted Kennedy wants to block the President's appointment of conservative, Christian,
pro-life judges to the federal bench. He applies a contemptible "litmus" test to
the President's nominees: If you're Christian, if you're conservative, if you're pro-life,
don't even bother applying; you're automatically disqualified.
President Bush has boldly nominated a number of highly qualified candidates, but Sen.
Kennedy and a few of his colleagues in the Senate have stalled the nominations by
filibustering, or endlessly debating, refusing to vote on the nominees. So President Bush
went ahead and appointed Judge William Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit during a Senate
recess. This was proper, entirely within the President's constitutional powers. But Sen.
Kennedy orchestrated a federal lawsuit.
This legal maneuver, coming from a member of the United States Senate, is wrong,
unconstitutional, and unprecedented in our history. If he wins the lawsuit, this one
Senator will have virtual "veto power" over the President's appointments. In
other words, Senator Kennedy will acquire the power of a dictator of constitutional order,
while you and I, citizens living under the law, have no choice but to stand by and watch
him take over.
But our commitment is to protect your constitutional freedoms, and that is what we are
doing. Edwin Meese, Attorney General under the late President Ronald Reagan, has asked the
Eleventh Circuit Court to set right this abuse of power, and we are standing with him. We
have already filed a major brief, representing Attorney General Meese and the interests of
the ACLJ and its members, arguing bluntly that Sen. Kennedy's attack should be rejected by
the court.
Sen. Kennedy's lawsuit contradicts settled constitutional principles. It contradicts
historic practice. It contradicts case law. He created the problem, then has the gall to
complain about it. If he and other Senators simply complied with their constitutional
duties and allowed an up-or-down vote on Judge Pryor's nomination in the Senate, this
issue would evaporate.
As we have declared plainly in our brief: "The supposed problem is one of Senator
Kennedy's own creation.... SENATOR KENNEDY SHOULD NOT BE HEARD TO COMPLAIN OF PROBLEMS
THAT ARE OF HIS OWN MAKING."
At the same time, we are pushing hard for the Senate to change its own internal rules,
putting a stop to the filibustering of judicial nominations, to fulfill the letter and the
spirit of the law under our U.S. Constitution.
Sen. Kennedy's case will almost certainly move up to the Supreme Court of the United
States, and we are already preparing for this. It's a complicated process, with numerous
legal approaches which must be researched and planned for. It's time-consuming and costly.
We will not back down, however: not when Ted Kennedy is usurping your rights as a citizen.
Not when he is taking virtual veto power over the President's appointments. Not
when he is essentially deleting a provision of the U.S. Constitution.
This issue must be nailed down before Congress departs for the elections. This is a
constitutional showdown.
Who decides who will be a federal court judge? The Constitution says the President does,
with the "advice and consent" of the Senate. If the Senate can't act, because it
is stranded by a few obstructionist members on a technicality -- then who is violating the
Constitution?
Sen. Ted Kennedy's lawsuit is without merit. It is desperation politics at its worst. We
will not stand idle while he makes a mockery of constitutional law.
We are girding ourselves for a filing at the Supreme Court. In fact, this may get
scheduled for expedited review, which means we'll be on an incredibly short timeline.
We've had years of obstructionist tactics by a tiny Senate minority. The majority clearly
supports the President's nominations to the federal judiciary. They represent the obvious
will of the American people. One liberal Senator from Massachusetts shouldn't be allowed
to railroad the entire judicial nomination process.
Yours for justice, Jay Alan Sekulow, Chief Counsel
http://aclj.org/news/pressreleases/041011_judicial.asp
Voice Your Opinion Click
Here |
