THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VII, Issue # 184, August 23, 2005
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
PRESIDENT, SENATE, & APPOINTMENT OF FEDERAL JUDGES:
A FLAWED SENATE CONFIRMATION PROCESS
YIELDS A FLAWED FEDERAL JUDICIARY
By Christopher G. Adamo
THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR FILLING VACANCIES ON THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT & ON THE LOWER FEDERAL
COURTS: PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION & SENATE CONFIRMATION, THAT IS, JOINT APPOINTMENT BY THE PRESIDENT &
THE SENATE -- HOW THIS ASPECT OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM OF CHECKS & BALANCES HAS BECOME
FLAWED AS A RESULT OF ITS MISUSE & ABUSE BY LIBERAL LEFTIST DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE -- MISUNDERSTANDING &
DISTORTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE OF THE SENATE IN THE JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS -- THE CONSEQUENCE:
THE POLITICALIZATION & SHARP DECLINE IN QUALITY OF AMERICA'S FEDERAL JUDICIARY
FULL STORY:
While many American Conservatives still hold out hope that President George W. Bush will reverse the abominable condition of the
nation’s federal courts, prospects look increasingly bleak. Sadly, the situation appears to be locked in its despicable state, not merely
because of the autocratic nature of those judges presently serving on the federal bench, but more so as a result of the process by
which new members ascend to such positions.
An assessment of the current U.S. Senate confirmation process clearly indicates that few, if any, of the principals involved, whether
the nominees themselves, the President or the Senate, have a strong understanding as to how and why the process was established.
And, with the current method of confirmation being so skewed, prospects for any worthwhile individual to actually make it to the
federal bench appear less a matter of fitness than random chance.
Much discussion has transpired in recent weeks over the qualifications of John Roberts, President Bush’s nominee to replace retiring
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Yet little of this discussion, particularly among the President’s partisan opponents,
centers on Roberts’ actual eligibility, or lack thereof. Far worse is the fact that the Republicans, who ostensibly should be on the
President’s side in this debate, appear as clueless as those on the political Left. And such has been the case for quite some time.
Roberts, they claim, is “squeaky clean,” not on the basis of an unshakable advocacy of constitutional principle, but rather because he
does not appear to cross the ideological lines of the Liberal Leftist Democrats' precious “litmus tests.”
Throughout much of the Twentieth Century, judicial confirmations verged on being a mere formality, providing that nominees
possessed the necessary legal credentials. But, as the battle over the nation’s governing ideology escalated, partisan Democrats
began searching for any appearance of scandal or impropriety as a means of disqualifying nominees.
This situation degenerated during the 1987 confirmation hearings of Robert Bork, in which irrelevant events of Bork’s past were
trumpeted as a means of discrediting him. But things reached an absolute low in the 1991 confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas.
During that sordid episode, baseless accusations of sexual harassment were invoked in last minute efforts to derail the nomination.
Thomas creditably acquitted himself of the slanderous charges and was subsequently confirmed. But, rather than standing
immovably by his selection of Thomas as a sterling example of a judge who upheld the United States Constitution, a shell-shocked
President George H. W. Bush reacted to the controversy by attempting to find someone less inflammatory to fill the next vacant seat
on the Supreme Court.
The President’s quest for common ground with his adversaries eventually turned up the seemingly mild-mannered David Souter.
Consequently, America has since suffered dreadfully from Souter’s banalities, ineptitude, and outright Liberal activism.
During the Clinton administration, Republicans had an opportunity to return the Senate confirmation process to its constitutional
framework. Instead, they completely dropped the ball. Rather than holding Bill Clinton’s nominees to an immutable standard of
recognizing of their constitutional role, and stressing the non-negotiable necessity of diligently upholding it as such, Republicans
responded with the platitude “The President should be allowed his choice of nominees.”
While intending to shame the contentious Democrats for having degenerated previous confirmations into political catfights, such
absurd and cowardly reasoning -- we must allow President Clinton his choice of nominees -- completely ignored the legitimate
constitutional purpose of the confirmation process.
In truth, the process was intended as a crucial check on the power of the executive and judicial branches of the U.S. national
government, ensuring that the Senate would establish in office only those individuals who could be counted upon to adjudicate
with integrity and fidelity to the principles of law and the constitutional foundations of the country. Thus the only worthy litmus
test is a nominee’s faithfulness to the U.S. Constitution.
Granting a president “his choice of nominees,” reduces the federal judiciary to nothing more than a “spoil of victory” for the
reigning President and his political party. From such a distorted process, no great potential for a worthwhile judiciary can be
anticipated.
Thus, with only two of the U.S. Supreme Court justices being nominated by a Democratic President during the past thirty-seven
years, the Court is nonetheless overwhelmingly devoid of members who would fight to uphold the Constitution, though that
premise is among the basic principles they have sworn to uphold.
The remaining seven seats were filled by Republican presidents. Yet only three members of the Court qualify to be there on the
basis of their history of upholding the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Considering how much is presently at stake, this does not
bode well for the future of the American Republic.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Appointment of U.S. Federal Judges
Legal Issues, Lawyers, & America's Judiciary
U.S. Constitutional Law & Political Philosophy
American Government & the U.S. Congress
American Government & the U.S. Presidency
American Politics & Political Competition
Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming and works in the field of industrial instrumentation.
He is actively involved in Wyoming's political process, serving as a delegate to successive Wyoming State Republican Conventions
and as a member of the Wyoming State Republican Central Committee. He has assisted Republican candidates for local and state
legislatures and for the United States Congress. His articles, which appear regularly in The Progressive Conservative, U.S.A.,
and on a number of other websites, reflect a major concern with the damage being done to Conservatism and Conservative causes by
the Liberal Leftist faction in the Republican Party as well as by the much larger and more powerful Liberal Leftist faction in the
Democratic Party. During the early and middle 1990s, Adamo was Editor of the Wyoming Christian Coalition's official news organ,
The Wyoming Christian.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VII, 2005
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues