Skip to main content

About your Search

2017 6
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
restored the status quo before the administration of president george w. bush. it was during that administration when some of our friends across the aisle along with some of their liberal law professor allies dreamed up a way of blocking president george w. bush's judicial nominees, and that was by suggesting that 60 votes was really the threshold for confirming judges rather than the constitutional requirement of a majority vote. it's been a long journey back to the normal functioning of the united states senate. and it's amazing that it's taking a nominee like judge gorsuch to bring us back to where we were back around 2001. we've been debating and discussing this nominee for a long time now, and they've tried -- the opponents of judge gorsuch have tried time and time again to raise objections to this outstanding nominee, a nomination that no one in the senate opposed ten years ago when he was confirmed to a position on the tenth circuit court of appeals. they claimed he wasn't mainstream enough. they've said this was a seat that really should have gone to merrick garland. they'
necessitated more cloture votes than any other previous president combined, from george washington to george w. bush. republicans demanded cloture votes 79 times over five years. in contrast from the founding fathers all the way through george w. bush, the senate only faced that situation 68 times. republicans obstructed obama nominees more in five years than the senate obstructed all nominees combined in two centuries. after a nominee would break through, republicans often would vet overwhelmingly to confirm the very nominee they adamantly delayed. tches clear the sole -- it was clear the sole guiding principle was obstruction and delay. obama nominees had the longest wait time. president obama tied with president clinton for tt fewest number of circuit court nominees confirmed during that same period. all that time, judicial vacancies stacked up, critical public service roles went unfilled and the american public regarded congress as a place where nothing of substance could occur. it was under those dire and unprecedented circumstances that i reluctantly changed the rules, very cons
is judge paul kelly who was appointed by president george h.w. bush. but there have also been several of his colleagues nominated by president bill clinton. judge gorsuch even mentioned in his testimony that he was in judge panels and presiding with judge william holloway who was appointed by president lyndon b. johnson. these three-judge panels tend to have judges who were appointed by republicans and democrats alike. 97% of the time unanimous. 98% of the time his decisions were in the majority. so again, i think it's pretty good, the odds are pretty good that we're going to agree with judge gorsuch a lot of more than we disagree with him when we look at his cases. he's a consensus builder. he's a guy that figures out how to come to a decision that people agree with on different sides of the aisle and from different points of view. that's what his record is. actually that doesn't surprise me at all because he clerked in the supreme court for two justices. one was byron white and the other was justice anthony kennedy. those are two justice who get a lot of heat from both sides why? be
majority support were simply not in the accepted playbook. what senate democrats did during george w. bush's presidency, mr. president, changed the senate forever. next up was samuel alito. but chief justice rehnquist andt justice alito is they partisan but but chief justice rehnquist, they overcame that filibuster. what is notable about justice alito if he received fewer than 60 votes for confirmation. he overcame the filibuster because night teen senate on democrats voted to end debaten. even though only for ultimately voted for confirmation. 15 senate democrats chose not to filibuster justice alito even though they opposed his nomination because they recognize that filibuster any supreme court nominee with clear majority support had no precedent in this body's norms are history. what happens when barack obama? became president and republicans had an opportunity for payback? did they filibustered justice sonia sotomayor and evening he taken? of course not. matter republicans voted against justice sotomayor and against justice kagan, but no republican try to come to a vote. once aga
president george w. bush to the tenth circuit in 2006. he was unanimously confirmed any the united states senate. in fact, some of those democrats who did not oppose judge gorsuch then included his harvard law classmate barack obama, vice president joe biden, and minority leader chuck schumer. of utmost importance in a justice is a desire and the ability to apply the law as it was intended, not to legislate from the bench. so i can tell you i was very thrilled to hear judge gorsuch say this -- he said, a judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge, stretching for results he prefers rather than those the law demands. on february 9, i met judge gorsuch in my office. let me tell you, he's impressive. we discussed the constitution. we discussed the second amendment. i represent the state of montana. i can tell you, as we look at our constitution and our bill of rights, the second amendment is very important to the people of montana. he will defend the second amendment. we talked about the separation of powers, the role of government and federalism and the fourth amendm
quote republican president, george h.w. bush. we all know what happened to clarence thomas. if the gloves were off for bork, the brass knuckles came out for thomas. here's how left-leaning columnist juan williams described the situation. he said, to listen or read some news reports on thomas over the past month is to discover a mondayser of a man -- monster of a man, unlike the man i saw as a reporter who watched him for some ten years. that was juan williams on clarence thomas. he's been conveniently transformed into a monster about whom it is fair to say anything, for whom it is fair to do anything, williams said. by the time bill clinton won the presidency, bork had become a verb -- a verb. and high-tech lynching was on the lips of the nation. wounds were fresh and deep when this democratic president had the chance to name two justices of his tone the -- of his own to the court. now, mr. president, republicans could have responded in kind to these nominees, but that's not what happened. when president clinton nominated ruth bader ginsburg the senate confirmed her 96-3. when president clinto
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6