NYT editorial: Bush judicial nominees appeal only to extreme wing of GOP

[DeepModem Mom]

Editorial
Help Wanted: Qualified Judges
Published: August 15, 2006

There has been a lot of talk about bipartisanship lately, notably from conservatives who say that Senator Joseph Lieberman’s loss in the Connecticut Democratic primary was a setback for the cause. But any message about the importance of interparty cooperation has not reached the White House’s judicial selection team or Republican leaders in the Senate. The latest judicial nominee they have dug in their heels to defend is a far-right lawyer who received a unanimous “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association. The Bush administration should withdraw his nomination and four others that are in limbo, and replace them with nominees who do not appeal exclusively to the most extreme wing of the Republican Party.

Michael Wallace, a former lawyer for Senator Trent Lott, the Mississippi Republican, has been nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, based in New Orleans. Mr. Wallace has a long record of insensitivity to civil rights. He argued in favor of letting Bob Jones University, which discriminated on the basis of race, keep its tax-exempt status, and he has a troubling record on voting rights. When the A.B.A. interviewed 69 lawyers and judges who knew him, it heard repeatedly that he was hostile to poor people and minorities. Of the 69, more than one-third expressed “grave concerns” about his judicial temperament....

***

With the Senate in recess, Mr. Wallace’s nomination has been returned to the White House, along with others that the Senate wisely declined to confirm. Those nominees include William Haynes II, a chief architect of the administration’s detainee policies. The White House should replace those men with nominees worthy of these important posts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/opinion/15tues1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[Webster Green]

1. They are relentless...

Cheney's dream of fascism is all that matters to these assholes.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

2. Circuit Courts of Appeals are more influential than the Supreme Court

The vast majority of case law is established by the Circuit Courts of Appeals. Even though each Circuit covers only certain states, its decisions are the law of the land for nearly all the cases within those states. The Supreme Court grants certiorari for very few cases (these cases are initially screened by the law clerks, but that's another issue), and unless it issues a decision that applies to your case, you're stuck with whatever your Circuit Court of Appeals has decided. By appointing right-wing radicals as appellate judges * is ensuring the continuation of his insane philosophy for generations to come. This is true especially when the appointee is young (late 30s and early 40s) and will serve for decades.

[xchrom]

3. one of the corners of the conservative revolution.

unless liberals/progressives develop a long term aggressive program of getting back in control for a very long time{i.e. governing effectively} -- this will cause many problems for the country as a whole.

the goal of conservative is to gain control of judiciary -- among other things -- and should not be overlooked philosophically or strategically.

[enough]

4. k&r

[Skittles]

5. let's just say it: Wallace is racist bastard

f***ing STOP this g.d. NONSENSE