Jul 01 2005

Replacing O’Connor – Brown?

Published by at 7:20 pm under All General Discussions,Filibuster Showdown

Why did all the big hitting news this week hit on the days I was flying? So we now have one confirmed justice to replace. I find it interesting Rehnquist was not first, but I am sure the Bush and administration and the GOP senate wanted to establish some precedence on ‘extraordinary circumstances’ (the filibuster trigger from the Gang of 14 agreement) with the O’Connor seat first.

RealClearPolitics as a great round up of information (as I am sure everyone does). Bush’s comments may be telling

Sandra Day O’Connor joined the nation’s highest court in 1981 as the first woman ever appointed to that position.

This leads me to believe he will probably nominate Owens or Brown so as to retain the number of women on the court. My bet (and, honestly, preference) is Brown.

The nation also deserves a dignified process of confirmation in the United States Senate, characterized by fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote. I will choose a nominee in a timely manner so that the hearing and the vote can be completed before the new Supreme Court term begins.

Fair warning to the democrats that they will need to tred carefully on the filibuster trigger. And of course they will ignore it. My belief is there will be one or more resignations coming and they will all try and be filled before the next session. This will put pressure on the dems to have provable, solid concerns or allow a vote.

Frist’s comments echo Bush’s and re-affirm my suspicion Rogers or Owens may be tapped. But I am sure it will be another woman nominee

For over twenty-three years, Justice O’Connor has been one of the Supreme Court’s finest justices. As the first female Justice, this simple ‘cowgirl from Arizona’ has been a trailblazer for women and rightfully earned her place in history. She has served with distinction and dignity

Reid’s comments are little more than a plea to be relevant

The Constitution gives the President and the Senate shared responsibility to fill this vacancy, because the President may only act with the “Advice and Consent” of the Senate. At this critical moment, the President must recognize the Senate’s constitutional role. He should give life to the Advice and Consent Clause by engaging in meaningful consultation with Senators of both political parties.

My other prediction is the dems will play this really badly, as they have been doing all year. For example, Dean puts his foot in his mouth immediatley:

Democrats hope this process can be one of consensus, rather than confrontation, but that will be up to President Bush

Does he honestly think everyone forgot the agreement and how it was the democrats who screamed Brown, Owens and Pryor were all extremists and out of the maintstream, only to allow their confirmation votes. You can only cry ‘wolf’ so many time Howie.

I know everyone is blogging this and blogging it well. So there is no use trying to link to others. Some of interest though include the instigator of The Coalition of The Chillin’, Mark Coffey has the top ten lunacies from the left – fun stuff! So does the Kommissar at Politburo Diktat. The Anchoress has some good points on the example the GOP set with Ginsburg.

You all know where all the big bloggers hang out!


Well at least Polipundit agrees with me to a degree.

Comments Off on Replacing O’Connor – Brown?

Comments are closed.