Responses from various organizations to the “Filibuster Compromise"
May 24, 2005
From Planned Parenthood:
Last night a bipartisan group of 14 senators struck a compromise on the "nuclear option."
This deal will allow filibusters to be used only under "extraordinary" circumstances in the future, and will not allow filibusters for three of the seven extremist nominees currently under discussion. The confirmation of these three appeals court nominees — Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla R. Owen, and William Pryor — will be voted on, as soon as today or tomorrow, by the full Senate.
This last-second compromise is bittersweet for those of us who were counting on our senators to make sure that moderate, reasonable judges head up our federal courts. On the same day that the current U.S. Supreme Court accepted a case that will revisit restrictions on legal access to abortion, the Senate has compromised an important protection against confirmation of extremist judges. The bottom line is this — U.S. senators have agreed to allow extremist judges one step closer to the federal courts.
Today the Senate will vote to continue debate on the nomination of extremist Priscilla Owen and move to a final vote on her nomination. Our voices — your voice — needs to be heard on this issue during the next 24 hours!!
As I write this note, the Senate is gearing up for an all-night debate on Owen's nomination. You can fight against Owen's possible confirmation by reaching out to the 14 senators who brokered this compromise. We have set up a special form here that you can use to quickly and easily reach these key senators.
Yours for Choice,
Karen Pearl
*** *** *** *** ***
From The Feminist Majority: The Fight to Protect the Courts Is Not Over!
Dear Feminist Activist,
As you may have already heard, 14 Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have struck a deal that puts the so-called “nuclear option” off the table, at least for now. The deal allows filibusters to be used against judicial nominees in “extraordinary circumstances.” Unfortunately, the deal also allows a simple majority vote on three of the most anti-women’s and civil rights judicial nominees to the federal Circuit Courts of Appeals: Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, and William Pryor.
Will saving women’s lives, women’s rights, and civil rights be considered such an extraordinary circumstance? If the records of the three anti-women’s rights, anti-civil rights nominees who will not be filibustered under the deal are to be the standard, then these rights are in grave peril.
But at least we have a chance. Without any possibility of a filibuster, we would have a very slim chance under the present circumstances of blocking an extreme anti-women’s rights and civil rights Supreme Court nominee.
We must remain tough and vigilant. Please send a message to your Senators today urging them to vote against Rogers Brown, Owen, and Pryor.
The first vote is scheduled for tomorrow on Priscilla Owen’s nomination. Votes on Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor are expected in the next two weeks.
Owen, a Texas Supreme Court justice, has voted against a woman’s right to choose in every abortion-related opinion. Her dissenting opinion in a case involving a minor who wished to obtain a judicial bypass for an abortion was called “an unconscionable act of judicial activism” by none other than President Bush’s Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Owen is a Big Business nominee who consistently rules against consumers and tried to weaken discrimination protections in employment.
Rogers Brown, a justice on California’s Supreme Court, has denounced the New Deal as the “triumph of our own socialist revolution.” That puts in jeopardy Social Security, Fair Labor Standards, the minimum wage, and the list goes on. She has received a partial “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association. In her public speeches, she has criticized the legal theory that underlies the right to privacy, abortion, and access to birth control, and she voted to protect racist speech in the workplace under the First Amendment.
Pryor has called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history." He has repeatedly argued in favor of a state's right to be exempt from federal laws banning discrimination. Commenting on the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn laws banning consensual sodomy, Pryor said, “… a constitutional right that protects ‘the choice of one’s partner’ . . . must logically extend to activities like prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia (if the child should credibly claim to be ‘willing’).”
Please, take action today – urge your Senators to vote against these extreme right-wing judicial nominees.
*** *** *** *** ***
NOW Asks: Senate Nuclear Option Deal—Victimized or Compromised?
May 24, 2005
Fourteen senators reached a bipartisan compromise last night, pulling the Senate back from the brink and avoiding the nuclear option for now, but giving a pass to three extremist judges who fully deserved to be filibustered.
"The entire 'nuclear option' maneuver was an exercise in scorched-earth politics. In pushing it, what Bill Frist and the Republican leadership really compromised was their integrity," said NOW President Kim Gandy. "Our democracy was compromised by the machinations of a power-hungry administration and their lackeys in the Senate who put their allegiance to George W. Bush above their oath of office."
A compromise by some middle-roaders in both parties preserved the filibuster for another day, another fight, but perhaps at too high a cost. In the so-called compromise, seven Republican senators agreed not to vote for the "nuclear option" to ban the filibuster, and seven Democratic senators agreed not to use the filibuster against three of the Bush's most extreme nominees, and henceforth only in extraordinary cases. Here's the rub: the filibuster was only being used in extraordinary cases anyway — only 10 of more than 200 nominees so far.
"The Senate 'compromise' was more like a mugging," said Gandy, "where the thug says 'if you give me what I want, I won't shoot you . . . at least not right now.' Indeed, the victim may feel relieved for the moment, but has been victimized nonetheless. And may yet be shot."
Priscilla Owen, who will likely be voted on this week, was publicly criticized at least a dozen times by Bush's own Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, when they were both on the Texas Supreme Court. In one case, when Owen tried to re-write Texas' abortion laws to suit her own ideology, Gonzales referred to her attempt as "unconscionable judicial activism."
Janice Rogers Brown is a staunch opponent of women's rights and civil rights. Her views lie so far outside the mainstream that she was the lone dissenter on the California Supreme Court in decision after decision. Just this week the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, affirmed that court in a case in which Brown had vociferously dissented — and even commented negatively on Brown's dissent. Not even Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas came to the defense of her shoddy reasoning and outrageous conclusions.
William Pryor, a former Alabama attorney general, used his office to oppose the traditional separation between church and state. He has consistently argued against a woman's right to choose abortion, calling Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination in the history of Constitutional law." Pryor also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court, arguing that a key provision of the Violence Against Women Act interfered with "state's rights," and was therefore unconstitutional.
"Who heard a peep from the Senators who now profess such a deep conviction that every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote, when 60 of Bill Clinton's nominees (including some for these same vacancies) were denied a floor vote?" asked Gandy.
"Their crocodile tears for these extremist nominees don't cover up the fact that they are willing to abuse their power and sacrifice the integrity and trust of the many for the greed of the few. For the future of our country and our courts, we must not let them. We must defeat Owen, Brown, Pryor, and every extremist nomination that comes to the Senate."
From Planned Parenthood:
Last night a bipartisan group of 14 senators struck a compromise on the "nuclear option."
This deal will allow filibusters to be used only under "extraordinary" circumstances in the future, and will not allow filibusters for three of the seven extremist nominees currently under discussion. The confirmation of these three appeals court nominees — Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla R. Owen, and William Pryor — will be voted on, as soon as today or tomorrow, by the full Senate.
This last-second compromise is bittersweet for those of us who were counting on our senators to make sure that moderate, reasonable judges head up our federal courts. On the same day that the current U.S. Supreme Court accepted a case that will revisit restrictions on legal access to abortion, the Senate has compromised an important protection against confirmation of extremist judges. The bottom line is this — U.S. senators have agreed to allow extremist judges one step closer to the federal courts.
Today the Senate will vote to continue debate on the nomination of extremist Priscilla Owen and move to a final vote on her nomination. Our voices — your voice — needs to be heard on this issue during the next 24 hours!!
As I write this note, the Senate is gearing up for an all-night debate on Owen's nomination. You can fight against Owen's possible confirmation by reaching out to the 14 senators who brokered this compromise. We have set up a special form here that you can use to quickly and easily reach these key senators.
Yours for Choice,
Karen Pearl
*** *** *** *** ***
From The Feminist Majority: The Fight to Protect the Courts Is Not Over!
Dear Feminist Activist,
As you may have already heard, 14 Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have struck a deal that puts the so-called “nuclear option” off the table, at least for now. The deal allows filibusters to be used against judicial nominees in “extraordinary circumstances.” Unfortunately, the deal also allows a simple majority vote on three of the most anti-women’s and civil rights judicial nominees to the federal Circuit Courts of Appeals: Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, and William Pryor.
Will saving women’s lives, women’s rights, and civil rights be considered such an extraordinary circumstance? If the records of the three anti-women’s rights, anti-civil rights nominees who will not be filibustered under the deal are to be the standard, then these rights are in grave peril.
But at least we have a chance. Without any possibility of a filibuster, we would have a very slim chance under the present circumstances of blocking an extreme anti-women’s rights and civil rights Supreme Court nominee.
We must remain tough and vigilant. Please send a message to your Senators today urging them to vote against Rogers Brown, Owen, and Pryor.
The first vote is scheduled for tomorrow on Priscilla Owen’s nomination. Votes on Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor are expected in the next two weeks.
Owen, a Texas Supreme Court justice, has voted against a woman’s right to choose in every abortion-related opinion. Her dissenting opinion in a case involving a minor who wished to obtain a judicial bypass for an abortion was called “an unconscionable act of judicial activism” by none other than President Bush’s Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Owen is a Big Business nominee who consistently rules against consumers and tried to weaken discrimination protections in employment.
Rogers Brown, a justice on California’s Supreme Court, has denounced the New Deal as the “triumph of our own socialist revolution.” That puts in jeopardy Social Security, Fair Labor Standards, the minimum wage, and the list goes on. She has received a partial “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association. In her public speeches, she has criticized the legal theory that underlies the right to privacy, abortion, and access to birth control, and she voted to protect racist speech in the workplace under the First Amendment.
Pryor has called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history." He has repeatedly argued in favor of a state's right to be exempt from federal laws banning discrimination. Commenting on the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn laws banning consensual sodomy, Pryor said, “… a constitutional right that protects ‘the choice of one’s partner’ . . . must logically extend to activities like prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia (if the child should credibly claim to be ‘willing’).”
Please, take action today – urge your Senators to vote against these extreme right-wing judicial nominees.
*** *** *** *** ***
NOW Asks: Senate Nuclear Option Deal—Victimized or Compromised?
May 24, 2005
Fourteen senators reached a bipartisan compromise last night, pulling the Senate back from the brink and avoiding the nuclear option for now, but giving a pass to three extremist judges who fully deserved to be filibustered.
"The entire 'nuclear option' maneuver was an exercise in scorched-earth politics. In pushing it, what Bill Frist and the Republican leadership really compromised was their integrity," said NOW President Kim Gandy. "Our democracy was compromised by the machinations of a power-hungry administration and their lackeys in the Senate who put their allegiance to George W. Bush above their oath of office."
A compromise by some middle-roaders in both parties preserved the filibuster for another day, another fight, but perhaps at too high a cost. In the so-called compromise, seven Republican senators agreed not to vote for the "nuclear option" to ban the filibuster, and seven Democratic senators agreed not to use the filibuster against three of the Bush's most extreme nominees, and henceforth only in extraordinary cases. Here's the rub: the filibuster was only being used in extraordinary cases anyway — only 10 of more than 200 nominees so far.
"The Senate 'compromise' was more like a mugging," said Gandy, "where the thug says 'if you give me what I want, I won't shoot you . . . at least not right now.' Indeed, the victim may feel relieved for the moment, but has been victimized nonetheless. And may yet be shot."
Priscilla Owen, who will likely be voted on this week, was publicly criticized at least a dozen times by Bush's own Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, when they were both on the Texas Supreme Court. In one case, when Owen tried to re-write Texas' abortion laws to suit her own ideology, Gonzales referred to her attempt as "unconscionable judicial activism."
Janice Rogers Brown is a staunch opponent of women's rights and civil rights. Her views lie so far outside the mainstream that she was the lone dissenter on the California Supreme Court in decision after decision. Just this week the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, affirmed that court in a case in which Brown had vociferously dissented — and even commented negatively on Brown's dissent. Not even Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas came to the defense of her shoddy reasoning and outrageous conclusions.
William Pryor, a former Alabama attorney general, used his office to oppose the traditional separation between church and state. He has consistently argued against a woman's right to choose abortion, calling Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination in the history of Constitutional law." Pryor also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court, arguing that a key provision of the Violence Against Women Act interfered with "state's rights," and was therefore unconstitutional.
"Who heard a peep from the Senators who now profess such a deep conviction that every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote, when 60 of Bill Clinton's nominees (including some for these same vacancies) were denied a floor vote?" asked Gandy.
"Their crocodile tears for these extremist nominees don't cover up the fact that they are willing to abuse their power and sacrifice the integrity and trust of the many for the greed of the few. For the future of our country and our courts, we must not let them. We must defeat Owen, Brown, Pryor, and every extremist nomination that comes to the Senate."
posted by Filibuster Theocracy at 9:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home