CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
May 21, 2012 – 10:58 p.m.
Appellate Judge Approval Lifts Democratic Hopes
By John Gramlich, CQ Staff
The Senate confirmed a federal appeals court judge on Monday, raising hopes among Democratic allies that more stalled judicial nominees can be confirmed before election year politics bring the process to a standstill.
The confirmation of Paul J. Watford to serve on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco came after Majority Leader
Some Republicans had voiced concerns about Watford’s nomination, citing his work with the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Immigration Law Center in opposition to Arizona’s controversial 2010 immigration law. Ultimately, however, they allowed his nomination to reach the floor, paving the way for a final vote that was the closest for any Obama appellate court judge since Nov. 19, 2009.
“For the 27th time, the majority leader was forced to file cloture to get an up-or-down vote on one of President Obama’s judicial nominations,” said Judiciary Chairman
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said he saw the confirmation of Watford as “a bit of a breakthrough in what’s been going on” since Republicans agreed to allow the vote on the confirmation despite having clear reservations about the nominee himself.
“My sense is that Reid may be emboldened by this” and may set up more cloture votes to force Republicans’ hand on pending nominees, Tobias said.
Watford is the fourth appellate court nominee confirmed by the Senate this year. His confirmation shows that some Obama nominees are advancing even as the presidential election season heats up and speculation intensifies about when, and whether, the so-called “Thurmond rule” will be invoked.
The rule traditionally has been interpreted to mean that, in presidential election years, judicial confirmations slow and eventually grind to a halt as the election approaches.
The rule is named after the late South Carolina Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond, who opposed President Lyndon Johnson’s nomination of Abe Fortas as chief justice in the summer of 1968, a presidential election year.
Watford is also the third judge to be confirmed by the Senate since the expiration of a March agreement between Reid and Minority Leader
Some liberal judicial organizations had feared that the expiration of the deal would result in Republicans essentially invoking the Thurmond rule and blocking further votes on the president’s judicial nominees, particularly the president’s powerful appellate court picks. On May 7, the day the leadership deal expired, the Obama administration met with advocacy groups in a strategy session aimed at winning more judicial confirmations and denouncing Republican “obstruction” of judges.
Monday’s vote, combined with action last week on a pair of district court nominees, suggests that fears of a shutdown in the confirmation of nominations were premature. The Senate last week confirmed two U.S. District Court nominees: George L. Russell III for the District of Maryland and John Tharp Jr. for the Northern District of Illinois.
Other Nominees Await Action
Appellate Judge Approval Lifts Democratic Hopes
Sixteen other judicial nominees, however, still await Senate action, and Democrats continue to accuse Republicans of obstructionism in getting them confirmed.
Obama, at this stage in his presidency, has had 146 judicial nominees confirmed, compared with 173 for President George W. Bush and 181 for President Bill Clinton, according to a recent tally from the Alliance for Justice, a liberal advocacy group.
Republicans blame the slow pace of confirmations on the slow rate of nominations by the president. According to the same tally, Obama has nominated 190 judges, compared with 221 for Bush and 233 for Clinton.
“The White House and the Democrats in the Senate are fond of their claim that ‘millions of Americans’ are living in districts with vacancies,” Sen.
Grassley said most of the federal courts with openings have been vacant for more than a year. “Once again, if the White House is serious about judicial vacancies, it holds the key to nominations for those vacancies,” he said. “It has failed, in too many instances, to use that key.”