Obama Lags on Judicial Picks, Limiting His Mark on Courts

[alp227]

President Obama is set to end his term with dozens fewer lower-court appointments than both Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush achieved in their first four years, and probably with less of a lasting ideological imprint on the judiciary than many liberals had hoped for and conservatives had feared.

Mr. Obama’s record stems in part from a decision at the start of his presidency to make judicial nominations a lower political priority, according to documents and interviews with more than a dozen current and former administration officials and with court watchers from across the political spectrum. Senate Republicans also played a role, ratcheting up partisan warfare over judges that has been escalating for the past generation by delaying even uncontroversial picks who would have been quickly approved in the past.

But a good portion of Mr. Obama’s judicial record stems from a deliberate strategy. While Mr. Bush quickly nominated a slate of appeals court judges early in his first year — including several outspoken conservatives — Mr. Obama moved more slowly and sought relatively moderate jurists who he hoped would not provoke culture wars that distracted attention from his ambitious legislative agenda.

“The White House in that first year did not want to nominate candidates who would generate rancorous disputes over social issues that would further polarize the Senate,” said Gregory B. Craig, Mr. Obama’s first White House counsel. “We were looking for mainstream, noncontroversial candidates to nominate.”

full: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/18/us/politics/obama-lags-on-filling-seats-in-the-judiciary.html?pagewanted=all

[msongs]

1. appeasing republicans is not a democratic party family value in my neighborhood nt

[grasswire]

2. the nature of a community organizer is to build consensus

more's the pity, for our democracy.

[intaglio]

3. So, Obama recognised that a "hold" would be put on anyone he nominated

This happened several times, and nominated those who might actually get through the appointment process.

[pansypoo53219]

4. i guess they ignored how many of his picks were stalled the past few years.

fine gnews rag ya got.

[bupkus]

5. I'm not a big NY Times fan

But to be fair, it's in the second paragraph of the story:

Mr. Obama’s record stems in part from a decision at the start of his presidency to make judicial nominations a lower political priority, according to documents and interviews with more than a dozen current and former administration officials and with court watchers from across the political spectrum. Senate Republicans also played a role, ratcheting up partisan warfare over judges that has been escalating for the past generation by delaying even uncontroversial picks who would have been quickly approved in the past.

It goes on to say that President Obama had a deliberate strategy of picking moderates not to cause any more partisan rancor in the Senate. And we all know how that worked out. There was partisanship on the part of the Republicans even over moderate, non-controversial choices.

There are some aspects of Obama's leadership I will never understand. Republicans don't worry about such nonsense as this. Take a look at Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin or New Jersey, just to name a few. They don't worry about whether or not hey have the votes or whether they'll cause partisan rancor. They just do what they like and push their wacko agenda regardless. Obama might take a page from that book if the Republicans don't steal another election with their same do whatever we like tactics like voter suppression, any fallout or partisan rancor from which they are not at all concerned about.

[Dustlawyer]

6. The Repugs own the 3rd branch of our government. In Texas, the plaintiff loses 93% of the time

We have a crisis where our rights are being taken and no one notices except for Citizens United. Repugs are definetely projecting when they say they do not want "Activists" judges! This is the Rodney Dangerfield issue of our time. It is not all about the Supreme Court and the Repugs recognize the value. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has newspapers they hand out for free outside of jury assembly rooms in places they have described as judicial hellholes. Www.southeasttexasrecord. This is one of them. They started for the 1st year without even running ads until they realized that making it appear like a legitimate paper would work better. Check out the opinions section.