Litigation

Some Senators Push to End Secret ?Holds?

By Peter Hardin

The Senate has confirmed magistrate Judge Audrey Fleissig of Missouri to the federal bench on a 90-0 vote, without even a whiff of opposition. But that vote came after a four-month wait due to delays orchestrated secretly by Republicans.

Because some senators are greatly frustrated by a practice allowing any senator to bottle up bills or nominations anonymously, a petition to end these holds has gained at least 65 signers, according to a Boston Globe article. The controversial practice has created prolonged vacancies on a number of federal courts.

On Tuesday, the Justice at Stake Campaign and two partner groups called for efforts by the White House and Senate leaders to reduce a growing backlog of judicial nominations (see Gavel Grab). The groups’ letter urged the Senate to end the practice of anonymous holds.

Vacant federal judgeships can delay justice. They may lead to longer waits for trials or appeals, most frequently on the civil docket, Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, told the Globe.

The article highlighted these facts about the current nominations process:

• About 100 federal judgeships are vacant, compared to 59 after President Obama was inaugurated, and 89 at a similar point in the administration of President George W. Bush. A Republican, he faced a Senate controlled by the other party, unlike Obama.
• An Obama nominee for the circuit bench faces an average wait of 116 days for a Senate confirmation vote, following approval by the Senate Judiciary Committee; this period is four times as lengthy as in a similar time of Bush’s presidency.
• For district court nominees named by Obama, the average wait for a Senate vote is 58 days, compared to 28 days under Bush.
• The Senate Judiciary Committee approved more than 25 judicial nominations that are awaiting Senate votes, and 17 of them encountered no opposition in committee.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, the committee chairman, asked, ?If they?ve gotten out of the committee unanimously, what?s the problem???

Republicans say judges are winning confirmation and that claims of political obstructionism are exaggerated. The Judiciary Committee, they point out, has handled judicial nominees more quickly than in Bush’s years.

Meanwhile an article by MSNBC examined judicial nominations and said Obama “isn’t off to a brisk pace when it comes to putting his imprint on the third branch of government ? the federal courts ? and some of his allies are disappointed, particularly with the prospect of a slimmed-down Senate majority after the midterm elections.”

To learn more about Obama’s record on judicial nominations, check out Gavel Grab.

Full post as published by The Gavel on June 23, 2010 (boomark / email).