We won this one guys! Estrada has removed himself from his bid for the judiciary.

Let this be a lesson to the Shrub Administration that you can't just instruct people to refuse to cooperate with Congress if you want to be an appellate judge.

This is from the September 4, 2003 program.

Here's an interview with Adam Schiff (D-CA) of the House Judiciary Committee on Fox News.

For the record:
Filibuster Holds!
How Senators Voted on the Estrada Filibuster

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=8981

Filibuster Holds!
How Senators Voted on the Estrada Filibuster
Cloture* Votes on the Nomination of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

See how your senators voted below. Click on a senator's name to phone, fax or e-mail your personal message about the votes to the senator. Thank those who voted NO (keep the filibuster going) and express your outrage to those who voted YES to the President's court-packing scheme.

First Cloture Vote - March 6, 2003
Vote Totals: 44 Nays - 55 Yeas - 1 Not Voting

Second Cloture Vote - March 13, 2003
Vote Totals: 42 Nays - 55 Yeas - 3 Not Voting

Third Cloture Vote - March 18, 2003
Vote Totals: 45 Nays - 55 Yeas

3/6/03 3/13/03 3/18/03
Alabama
Sen. Richard Shelby (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R) Yes Yes Yes
Alaska
Sen. Ted Stevens (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) Yes Yes Yes
Arizona
Sen. John McCain (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Jon Kyl (R) Yes Yes Yes
Arkansas
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) No No No
Sen. Mark Pryor (D) No No No
California
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) No No No
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) No No No
Colorado
Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Wayne Allard (R) Yes Yes Yes
Connecticut
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D) No No No
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D) No No No
Delaware
Sen. Joseph Biden, Jr. (D) No Not Voting No
Sen. Thomas Carper (D) No No No
Florida
Sen. Bob Graham (D) Not Voting No No
Sen. Bill Nelson (D) Yes Yes Yes
Georgia
Sen. Zell Miller (D) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) Yes Yes Yes
Hawaii
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D) No No No
Sen. Daniel Akaka (D) No No No
Idaho
Sen. Larry Craig (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Michael Crapo (R) Yes Yes Yes
Illinois
Sen. Richard Durbin (D) No No No
Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R) Yes Yes Yes
Indiana
Sen. Richard Lugar (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Evan Bayh (D) No No No
Iowa
Sen. Charles Grassley (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Tom Harkin (D) No No No
Kansas
Sen. Sam Brownback (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Pat Roberts (R) Yes Yes Yes
Kentucky
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Jim Bunning (R) Yes Yes Yes
Louisiana
Sen. John Breaux (D) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) No No No
Maine
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Susan Collins (R) Yes Yes Yes
Maryland
Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D) No No No
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D) No No No
Massachusetts
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D) No No No
Sen. John Kerry (D) No Not Voting No
Michigan
Sen. Carl Levin (D) No No No
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) No No No
Minnesota
Sen. Mark Dayton (D) No No No
Sen. Norm Coleman (R) Yes Yes Yes
Mississippi
Sen.Thad Cochran (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Trent Lott (R) Yes Yes Yes
Missouri
Sen. Christopher Bond (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Jim Talent (R) Yes Yes Yes
Montana
Sen. Max Baucus (D) No No No
Sen. Conrad Burns (R) Yes Yes Yes
Nebraska
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Ben Nelson (D) Yes Yes Yes
Nevada
Sen. Harry Reid (D) No No No
Sen. John Ensign (R) Yes Yes Yes
New Hampshire
Sen. Judd Gregg (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. John Sununu (R) Yes Yes Yes
New Jersey
Sen. Jon Corzine (D) No No No
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D) No No No
New Mexico
Sen. Pete Domenici (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D) No No No
New York
Sen. Charles Schumer (D) No No No
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) No No No
North Carolina
Sen. John Edwards (D) No Not Voting No
Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R) Yes Yes Yes
North Dakota
Sen. Kent Conrad (D) No No No
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D) No No No
Ohio
Sen. Mike DeWine (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. George Voinovich (R) Yes Yes Yes
Oklahoma
Sen. Don Nickles (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. James Inhofe (R) Yes Yes Yes
Oregon
Sen. Ron Wyden (D) No No No
Sen. Gordon Smith (R) Yes Yes Yes
Pennsylvania
Sen. Arlen Specter (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Rick Santorum (R) Yes Yes Yes
Rhode Island
Sen. Jack Reed (D) No No No
Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) Yes Yes Yes
South Carolina
Sen. Ernest Hollings (D) No No No
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) Yes Yes Yes
South Dakota
Sen. Thomas Daschle (D) No No No
Sen. Tim Johnson (D) No No No
Tennessee
Sen. Bill Frist (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R) Yes Yes Yes
Texas
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. John Cornyn (R) Yes Yes Yes
Utah
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Robert Bennett (R) Yes Yes Yes
Vermont
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D) No No No
Sen. James Jeffords (I) No No No
Virginia
Sen. John Warner (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. George Allen (R) Yes Yes Yes
Washington
Sen. Patty Murray (D) No No No
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D) No No No
West Virginia
Sen. Robert Byrd (D) No No No
Sen. John Rockefeller IV (D) No No No
Wisconsin
Sen. Herbert Kohl (D) No No No
Sen. Russ Feingold (D) No No No
Wyoming
Sen. Craig Thomas (R) Yes Yes Yes
Sen. Michael Enzi (R) Yes Yes Yes

* In order to end a Senate filibuster on a bill or nomination, 60 senators must vote in favor of what's called cloture. Senators have the option of calling for multiple cloture votes, but the filibuster cannot be ended until one of these votes attracts the support of 60 senators.

This is a 'just a for the record' kind of posting:
People For the United Way -- Filibuster Holds!
Organizations Opposed to the Confirmation of Miguel Estrada

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=8981

Filibuster Holds!
Organizations Opposed to the Confirmation of Miguel Estrada

All words (AND)
Any word (OR)
Exact phrase

Filibuster Holds!
Organizations Opposed to the Confirmation of Miguel Estrada
Forty-nine national, regional and state organizations have declared their opposition to Miguel Estrada's confirmation to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

A number of individual Latino Labor leaders have also announced their opposition to Estrada's confirmation. Read their letter and names.

ADA Watch/National Coalition for Disability Rights
AFL-CIO
Alliance for Justice
American Association of University Women
Americans for Democratic Action
California branch of the League of United Latin American Citizens
Coalition of Immokalee Workers
Community Rights Counsel
Congressional Black Caucus
Congressional Hispanic Caucus
Earthjustice
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
Farmworker Association of Florida
Feminist Majority
Friends of the Earth
General Board of Church and Society, The United Methodist Church
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
La Raza Lawyers Association of California
LaRed Latina
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
MoveOn.org
National Abortion Federation
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
NARAL Pro-Choice America
National Council of Jewish Women
National Employment Lawyers Association
National Fair Housing Alliance
National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association
National Farm Worker Ministry
National Organization for Women
National Partnership for Women and Families
National Women's Law Center
Natural Resources Defense Council
People For the American Way
PCUN (Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste/Northwest Treeplanters and Farmworkers United)
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice
Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund
Sierra Club
Society of American Law Teachers
Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project
United Auto Workers
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries
United Farm Workers of America
United States Hispanic Leadership Institute
William C. Velasquez Intitute
Working Assets
Carolyn Kuhl: Blocking the Path to Justice
Owen's Second Hearing Confirms Clear and Compelling Case Against Confirmation
Your email address
Update Your Profile

News From The Right
Right Wing Organizations
Right Wing Watch Online 2003
Protecting a Woman's Right to Privacy and Reproductive Choice
Opposing Carolyn Kuhl's Confirmation
2nd Hearing Confirms Case Against Priscilla Owen

Privacy Policy | Employment | Copyright & Disclaimer
People For the American Way • 2000 M Street, NW, Suite 400 • Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: 202-467-4999 or 800-326-7329 • pfaw@pfaw.org

Bush Calls For Ban on Judicial Filibusters
from CNN and the AP.

President Bush, his appeals court nomination of Miguel Estrada mired in party politics, called Tuesday for a ban on judicial filibusters and a mandatory vote on all court nominations he and future presidents send to the Senate.

In a letter read on the Senate floor by Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, Bush called for a permanent rule "to ensure timely up or down votes on judicial nominations both now and in the future, no matter who is president or which party controls the Senate. This is the only way to ensure our judiciary works and that good people remain willing to be nominated to the federal bench."

Senators in the past have called for similar changes but to no effect.

Republicans have so far failed in their efforts to end the Democratic filibuster of Estrada's nomination for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia...

Democrats have said Owen and Pickering would face serious opposition from them, including possible filibusters.

The Republicans lost a filibuster vote on Estrada on Thursday, with only four Democrats voting with the GOP majority to give him an immediate confirmation vote. Frist said he would soon try vote on ending the filibuster, and Hatch said he expects such a vote perhaps as early as next week.

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/senate.estrada.ap/index.html

notes at top from truthout:
http://truthout.org/docs_03/031303G.shtml

Editor's Note: Amid all the hue and cry regarding war in Iraq, Senate Democrats have been quietly but sternly wrestling Bush's judicial agenda to the mat with the ongoing filibuster of conservative judicial nominee Miguel Estrada. Republicans, frustrated by their inability to break the filibuster, have gone so far as to accuse the Democrats of anti-Hispanic bias on the matter. This ignores Estrada's ultra-conservative views, and further ignores the fact that the Senate was given no data with which to judge Estrada's nomination. Estrada refused to give up his papers, and has answered few questions before the Judiciary Committee. Thus, the filibuster.

Now, Mr. Bush and Senate Republicans have decided to try and overthrow a tried and true constitutional rule: the filibuster itself. Apparently, says Majority Leader Frist, the Democrats are failing the Founders by using the Constitution as it was meant to be used. Mr. Frist was apparently off practicing medicine when Republican Senators made rich use of the filibuster against Clinton's judicial nominees. And so it goes. - wrp

Bush Calls For Ban on Judicial Filibusters
CNN.com | Associated Press

Tuesday 11 March 2003

President Bush, his appeals court nomination of Miguel Estrada mired in party politics, called Tuesday for a ban on judicial filibusters and a mandatory vote on all court nominations he and future presidents send to the Senate.

In a letter read on the Senate floor by Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, Bush called for a permanent rule "to ensure timely up or down votes on judicial nominations both now and in the future, no matter who is president or which party controls the Senate. This is the only way to ensure our judiciary works and that good people remain willing to be nominated to the federal bench."

Senators in the past have called for similar changes but to no effect.

Republicans have so far failed in their efforts to end the Democratic filibuster of Estrada's nomination for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Frist, with Vice President Dick Cheney presiding in the chamber, said Tuesday the Estrada filibuster goes against what the founding fathers wanted from the Senate on judicial nominations. Democrats have "brought us to the point to failing that charge," Frist said.

Democrats cite 'precedent'

But Democrats said GOP senators have blocked Democratic judicial nominees from getting confirmation votes in the Senate as well.

"Because that precedent stands in the way of their political ends, Republicans now seek to deny their own words and their own actions," said Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. "They're here today to claim that the Constitution is threatened by the very same procedures that they themselves have employed. They're here today to claim the Constitution is going to be threatened by the very same powers that it grants."

But Bush called on the Senate to get beyond the past. "I ask senators of both parties to come together and end the escalating cycle of blame and bitterness and to restore fairness, predictability and dignity to the process," Bush said in the letter.

Republicans are moving aside Estrada's blocked appeals court nomination temporarily as they turn their attention to other Bush nominees, including Texas Supreme Court Judge Priscilla Owen, who was rejected last year when Democrats controlled the Senate.

Frist said Estrada's filibustered nomination won't be left behind. The delay is to move other controversial U.S. Appeals Court nominees such as Owen, Ohio appellate lawyer Jeff Sutton and Ohio Supreme Court Justice Deborah Cook.

Not giving up

"I'm not going to give up on the Estrada nomination," Frist said Monday. "We're going to pursue this nomination until we get an up or down vote."

Owen, a Texas Supreme Court Justice who wants a seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, was one of two White House judicial nominees voted down by Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee last year. Committee chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has planned a Thursday hearing, hoping to rehabilitate her nomination and move her on to the full Senate for confirmation with his GOP committee majority.

Democrats complained that Owen has been an anti-abortion and pro-business judicial activist whose opinions and rulings are overly influenced by her personal beliefs.
"The charge that she is a judicial activist was nothing more than a cynical trick of words from Washington special interest lobbyists," Hatch said Monday.

The other nominee who failed to clear the committee last year was U.S. District Judge Charles Pickering of Mississippi, who also wanted a seat on the 5th Circuit. Hatch has said Pickering also will get another hearing.

Democrats have said Owen and Pickering would face serious opposition from them, including possible filibusters.

The Republicans lost a filibuster vote on Estrada on Thursday, with only four Democrats voting with the GOP majority to give him an immediate confirmation vote. Frist said he would soon try vote on ending the filibuster, and Hatch said he expects such a vote perhaps as early as next week.

Tomorrow's the day you'll need to contact your representatives to tell them to vote against Estrada.

Make sure the staffers know you're a constituent. Then urge your
Senators to:

"Please SUPPORT the filibuster to stop Miguel Estrada.
Please vote AGAINST cloture."

Please let us know you're making these important calls, at:

http://www.moveon.org/callmade2.html

.....

A recent New York Times story on the filibuster is at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/12/politics/12ESTR.html

For more information on Estrada, there's a good fact sheet at:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=7795

* For more information on filibusters, see our bulletin at:
http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin11.html

Dear MoveOn member,

As we continue our Iraq campaign, we're also working to track the
most pressing domestic challenges from the Bush administration. While
Iraq is taking all the media focus, the right wing is using this
diversion to cover attacks on almost every front.

Tomorrow -- Thursday, March 6th -- our ability to withstand this
onslaught may come down to one crucial Senate vote. This vote
-- on the Miguel Estrada judicial nomination -- is widely seen as
a key moment defining whether the Democratic opposition can turn
back the worst of the right-wing initiatives.

The Senate will be voting on the filibuster* on the nomination of
Miguel Estrada to the D.C. appeals court. We need to support this
filibuster and the courageous Senators who are stepping forward
at this key moment. Please call your Senators *immediately* to make
your voice heard.

We've arranged a TOLL-FREE number for you to use. Please call it
twice to speak with both your Senators:

1-888-508-2974

If that number is busy, please call your Senators directly, at:

Senator Feinstein
DC Phone: 202-224-3841

Senator Boxer
DC Phone: 202-224-3553

Make sure the staffers know you're a constituent. Then urge your
Senators to:

"Please SUPPORT the filibuster to stop Miguel Estrada.
Please vote AGAINST cloture."

Please let us know you're making these important calls, at:

http://www.moveon.org/callmade2.html

Miguel Estrada is a stealth right-wing extremist who has never served
as a judge before, yet has been nominated by the White House to a seat
on America's second-highest court. He stonewalled the Senate during
his confirmation hearings last year, refusing to answer basic questions
about his legal & judicial philosophy. Estrada is widely thought to be
President Bush's top choice for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. His
silence on his views on the law is a direct challenge to all of us.

Calling Estrada's behavior "a new height of arrogance," Senators Tom
Daschle (D-SD) and Harry Reid (D-NV) have finally gotten their fellow
Democrats to take a unified stand on principle, and are rightly
refusing to allow Estrada's confirmation.

They have launched a filibuster -- a tactic of last resort that is a
minority party's only recourse to ensure that a narrow majority party
does not gain absolute power. It's a bold move. If the filibuster
holds, as it has for 3 weeks now, it will send a clear signal that the
right wing can not ram its radically unfair agenda through Congress.
If it fails, that will send the opposite, frightening message.

In effect, the Estrada filibuster is now our main line of defense
safeguarding the democracy we believe in and the society we want our
children to inherit. Republicans have just called for a "cloture" vote
-- an attempt to break the filibuster -- to take place this Thursday.

MoveOn members have played a huge part in making this filibuster
possible. For weeks, key Senators have been citing our thousands of
phone calls as a major force keeping the Democrats together. Even
today, they're talking about what a difference we're making.

Unity among Senators to maintain this filibuster is crucial. Please
call your Senators right now.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

--The MoveOn Team
Carrie, Eli, Joan, Peter, Wes, and Zack
March 5, 2003

P.S.:

A recent New York Times story on the filibuster is at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/12/politics/12ESTR.html

For more information on Estrada, there's a good fact sheet at:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=7795

* For more information on filibusters, see our bulletin at:
http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin11.html
________________

This is a message from MoveOn.org. To unsubscribe from this list,
please visit our subscription management page at:
http://moveon.org/s?i=1128-1744928-IYWozvL5Seetc_vBqmS4nw

Senators fight over other nominees as Estrada debate drags on
By Jesse Holland for the SF Chronicle.

Senate Republicans forced committee approval of three of President Bush's judicial nominees Thursday, despite Democrats' efforts to delay action as they have delayed the high-profile nomination of Miguel Estrada to the federal appellate bench.

Democrats said Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, overrode committee rules to send U.S. Appeals Court nominees Deborah Cook and John Roberts to the Republican-controlled Senate, despite objections that they had the right to continue holding the nominees in committee.

Hatch said he was within his rights under committee rules to force a final vote.

"We're not going to have filibusters in committee," said an angry Hatch at the end of a three-hour hearing in which sharp words were exchanged between himself and Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

The hearing was heated at times, with Democrats at one point walking out to prevent Hatch from having enough committee members present to vote. "You may bully some but you're not going to bully me," Kennedy told Hatch.

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://truthout.org/docs_03/030103G.shtml

Thursday 27 February 2003

Senate Republicans forced committee approval of three of President Bush's judicial nominees Thursday, despite Democrats' efforts to delay action as they have delayed the high-profile nomination of Miguel Estrada to the federal appellate bench.

Democrats said Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, overrode committee rules to send U.S. Appeals Court nominees Deborah Cook and John Roberts to the Republican-controlled Senate, despite objections that they had the right to continue holding the nominees in committee.

Hatch said he was within his rights under committee rules to force a final vote.

"We're not going to have filibusters in committee," said an angry Hatch at the end of a three-hour hearing in which sharp words were exchanged between himself and Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

The hearing was heated at times, with Democrats at one point walking out to prevent Hatch from having enough committee members present to vote. "You may bully some but you're not going to bully me," Kennedy told Hatch.

"You're not going to bully me either," Hatch replied later.

For three weeks, Democrats have held up a confirmation vote on Estrada's nomination by threatening a full-blown filibuster.

Now Democrats are likely at least to ask for an extended Senate floor debate on Roberts and Cook to protest Hatch's action, even though both got votes from Judiciary Democrats.

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the lead Judiciary Democrat, said Hatch is ignoring committee rules that require a Democrat to agree to end a committee filibuster. Hatch said Senate parliamentarians informed him that as chairman he could force a vote on the president's nominees.

Cook, an Ohio Supreme Court justice, was approved by the committee by a 12-2 vote, with the rest of the Democrats passing or voting "present" to reserve their right to bring the issue up on the Senate floor. Roberts, a Washington appellate lawyer, was approved by the 19-member committee by a 14-3 vote with the rest of the Democrats passing or voting present.

The committee also sent the appellate court nomination of Justice Department lawyer Jay Bybee of Nevada to the Senate for confirmation by a 12-6 vote, with Leahy again voting present. Democrats had agreed earlier to allow his nomination through regardless of what happened with Cook and Roberts.

Democrats say they didn't have enough time to question Cook and Roberts during their original confirmation hearing because Hatch had three federal appellate candidates at the same hearing, instead of considering them one at a time. Liberals have accused Cook of ruling with business interests too much as a judge, and Roberts of opposing abortion rights, affirmative action and environmental protection laws.

Democrats blocked a committee vote on Roberts and Cook last week in hopes of asking additional questions, but White House counsel Alberto Gonzales said Wednesday the White House would resist additional hearings on the two, who were first nominated in May 2001.

Democrats are now likely to at least force a debate on Hatch's decision on the Senate floor, and could even filibuster the nominations of Cook and Roberts. "I don't expect it but I wouldn't put it past them," Hatch said.

Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota immediately took to the Senate floor to criticize Hatch, saying the maneuver "would not be tolerated."

"It cannot be the case that the rules of a committee will apply until the chairman of a committee deems them inconvenient," Daschle said.

Kennedy said it was a way to "steamroll the nominees through the Judiciary Committee and the Senate."

"It's the ultimate court-packing plan, and Democrats are right to reject it," Kennedy said.

Bush has called it a "travesty" that Democratic senators have refuse to allow a full Senate vote on Estrada's nomination.

"They're blocking the vote on this good man for purely political reasons," Bush said.

Democrats have refused to let Estrada's nomination for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia come up for a final Senate vote for three weeks because they say the Washington lawyer was not forthcoming about his legal opinions during his confirmation hearing last year.

Republicans lack the 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to force Democrats to allow a vote on Estrada.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) - Judiciary Committee Ranking Member is on CSPAN right now talking about the Estrada nomination.

Not a whole lot has changed. Estrada won't answer any questions from the Senate Judiciary committee and they are plenty pissed about it.

I'll grab some of this and put it up.

I also have another installment of my February 16th adventure going up today.

Then I have to cool it for a day or two while I finish up my grad school application before I miss the deadline...

The Shrub was going on and on about the Miguel Estrada nomination during his radio address yesterday. (Which I will upload shortly once I'm convinced it's not already available online.)

We'll probably need to call our Democrat congress critters tomorrow to show them support for Filibustering the vote on this guy.

It just isn't right for him to refuse to answer questions by the Senate Judiciary Committee. I've got more video from CSPAN a week ago when they were debating this issue, but my guess is there will be a lot of new debate tomorrow over this.

Remember that Bill Frist agreed that no vote can be taken until 5:30 pm on Monday. That means it could be a late night indeed...

That still gives us all day tomorrow to remind congress how much we care about this issue.

It took me less than a minute to call my senator last week and leave a message thanking her for "doing whatever he/she can to oppose the Miguel Estrada nomination."

These calls are typically tallied. No more than a sentance or two stating how you feel is required. They're busy too. The people on the phone are always very nice and glad you called, whatever you have to say.

Let's get in the habit of letting them know how we feel!

Here are some clips of Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana) from
yesterday's debate over the nomination of Miguel Estrada
to the second highest court in the land.

It was lengthly, but very interesting. I sure learn a lot watching
CSPAN. (Well, a lot compared to what I used to know before about this stuff anyway, which was nothing :)

Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana) explains a thing
or two about the Estrada situation
(Note: These clips are in no way complete -- he spoke for
two or three times as long as these clips):

Highlights with descriptions: Part 1: Baucus recalls how he
recalls Supreme Court Justice O'Connor starting the
practice of not answering certain questions when she
was being considered for the bench -- noting that she
had an extensive record from which she could be
assessed. Estrada, in contrast, has refused to answer
any questions whatsoever. (Not just one or two
questions that he doesn't feel comfortable about.)

Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 1 of 4 (Lo-Res - 17 MB)
Audio - Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 1 of 4 (Lo-Res - 2 MB)

Part 2 - Baucus talks about how important it is to
know what kind of a person that nominee is since
these are lifetime appointments.

Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 2 of 4 (Lo-Res - 17 MB)
Audio - Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 2 of 4 (Lo-Res - 2 MB)

Part 3 - Baucus elaborates about how he feels
responsible to do what is right by the people.
He also brings up the point that the Justice Dept.
probably interviewed Estrada before the Shrub
made his recommendation -- and asks "why wasn't
that information made available to the Senate?"

Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 3 of 4 (Lo-Res - 25 MB)
Audio - Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 3 of 4 (Lo-Res - 3 MB)

Part 4 - Baucus talks about when Roosevelt tried
to pack the Supreme Court when he didn't like
the decisions it had been making. (He tried to
add Justices to the court.) But the Senate stood
up to him. Now it is time, he said, for the Senate
to stand up against the blind approval of these kind
of mystery nominees.
Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 4 of 4 (Lo-Res - 40 MB)
Audio - Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN Part 4 of 4 (Lo-Res - 4 MB)

Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana) Complete Audio:
Audio - Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN - Parts 1-4 (Hi-Res - 10 MB)
Audio - Sen Max Baucus On CSPAN - Parts 1-4 (Lo-Res - 5 MB)

Senator Tim Johnson Explaining how Miguel Estrada refused to answer any questions asked of him by the Senate Judiciary Committee:

Audio Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN (MP3 - Hi-Res - 4 MB)

Audio Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN (MP3 - Lo-Res - 2 MB)

Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN - ALL (Lo-Res - 49 MB)

Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN Part 1 of 2 (Lo-Res - 25 MB)

Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN Part 2 of 2 (Lo-Res - 24 MB)

Senator Tim Johnson Explaining the dangers of setting a precendent where Judicial nominees would not have to provide any information about their beliefs (effectively rubber stamping presidential nominees):

More Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN (Lo-Res - 14 MB)

Audio - More Sen. Tim Johnson On CSPAN (MP3 - Hi-Res - 2 MB)

So Bill Frist just said that, although debate over Estrada will resume tomorrow, no roll call votes will occur regarding him or anything else until after 5:30 pm on Monday, February 24.

Looks like a Filibuster turned out not to be necessary. The threat of one was enough, apparently.

I'll be putting stuff up all nite from today's Senate session.

Okay so the deal with Estrada isn't that there's no way to determine how the guy feels about anything, because he's not providing any information about his record.

In fact, the root of the problem is that there's no way to determine much about him for sure, one way or the other. He has never served as a Judge anywhere else, so there's no way to judge him on past decisions. He's not a scholar so there are no academic writings from which his values can be derived.

He refused to provide the Senate with a single Supreme Court Decision he disagrees with, for instance. (Yes, in the entire history of the Supreme Court.)

There simply isn't enough information about the guy, and it appears that Estrada has been instructed by the Shrub Administration to not make any statements about anything -- even to the Senate attempting to evaluate him.

"He has refused to answer any basic questions. And he has no record...
The people deserve better," said Senator Tim Johnson (D- South Dakota)
"I hope that never again will we see this kind of stealth process."

Yeah, I'm recording it....Don't worry...And on VHS because my TiVOs so full these days. (How quaintly retro.)

Right now Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) is really hamming it up about Estrada being Hispanic, and working his way up from nothing as an immigrant, etc. "We think you've come far from a lowly background...and he's taken advantage of the opportunities that have been given to you...."

Anyway, tune in for yourself if you're interested...

Democrats Prepare for Estrada Filibuster
AP story by Jesse J. Holland.

The White House on Wednesday refused to release internal Justice Department (news - web sites) memos written by one of President Bush (news - web sites)'s nominees to an important appeals court, setting up a partisan showdown over Miguel Estrada.

Democrats say they will use a filibuster to keep Estrada from being confirmed for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit until the Washington lawyer answers more of their questions. They also want internal Justice memos Estrada wrote while working for the solicitor general's office. Democrats say those writings would reveal how Estrada would think as a judge...

Democrats said the refusal means the Estrada debate will drag on. "I regret that the White House remains recalcitrant and continues to stand in the way of a solution to this impasse," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee (news - web sites).

Bush said the Democratic plan to block his nominee, who would be the first Hispanic judge on the appeals courts, was "shameful politics." Senate GOP leader Bill Frist warned Democrats that he might force them to stay in the Senate chamber at night and on weekends until he gets a final vote on Estrada.

"I think it is important for America to understand that your side of the aisle is — whether or not you use the word filibuster or not — is obstructing or stalling a process that is important to our judicial system," said Frist, R-Tenn.

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20030213/ap_on_go_pr_wh/senate_estrada&e=2

White House - AP
Democrats Prepare for Estrada Filibuster
Wed Feb 12, 9:45 PM ET
Add White House - AP to My Yahoo!

By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The White House on Wednesday refused to release internal Justice Department (news - web sites) memos written by one of President Bush (news - web sites)'s nominees to an important appeals court, setting up a partisan showdown over Miguel Estrada.

Democrats say they will use a filibuster to keep Estrada from being confirmed for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit until the Washington lawyer answers more of their questions. They also want internal Justice memos Estrada wrote while working for the solicitor general's office. Democrats say those writings would reveal how Estrada would think as a judge.

But White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, in a letter Wednesday, told senators that the administration would not release the documents and that Justice normally does not release such documents. All of the living former solicitors general, four Democrats and three Republicans, have agreed with the White House's position, he said. "That is a fundamental principle that has been followed irrespective of the party that controls the White House and the Senate," Gonzales said.

Democrats said the refusal means the Estrada debate will drag on. "I regret that the White House remains recalcitrant and continues to stand in the way of a solution to this impasse," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee (news - web sites).

Bush said the Democratic plan to block his nominee, who would be the first Hispanic judge on the appeals courts, was "shameful politics." Senate GOP leader Bill Frist warned Democrats that he might force them to stay in the Senate chamber at night and on weekends until he gets a final vote on Estrada.

"I think it is important for America to understand that your side of the aisle is — whether or not you use the word filibuster or not — is obstructing or stalling a process that is important to our judicial system," said Frist, R-Tenn.

Democrats are looking for material they can use against Estrada, since he didn't provide them with anything controversial during his confirmation hearing last year, said Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "They couldn't dig up any dirt on him," Hatch said. "So what are they doing now? Trying to see through a fishing expedition if they can find some documents where they can."

Democrats have not yet tried a traditional filibuster on Estrada, although they say they will if necessary. That means lawmakers take over the Senate floor and refuse to allow the Senate to go home or move to other business until they get their way.

That type of filibuster is rare today, Senate historian Don Ritchie said. "The old image of 'Mr. Smith Goes To Washington,' and one senator holding the Senate for hours and hours doesn't happen anymore," Ritchie said.

Democrats say they have enough votes to sustain that type of filibuster against Estrada, who they contend lacks judicial experience. Democrats also complained about his refusal to answer questions about specific cases, including abortion rights, and to provide copies of the memos.

"It's simply not right for anyone to be asked to make a decision in the dark," said Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.

Since Estrada's nomination in May 2001, Republicans have accused Democrats of treating him unfairly because he is a conservative Hispanic. The GOP has the 51 votes needed to confirm him but not the votes to stop a filibuster.

Democrats "can vote against him. That is their right. And if that is what they want to do, that is the proper exercise of their constitutional duty," Hatch said.

"But to simply deny the Senate a vote is unfair to the nominee, it's unfair to this body, it's unfair to the president, it's unfair to the majority of senators who want to vote for this man."

Daschle said if they do not force Estrada to answer their questions, other Bush nominees will stonewall them. "If we don't draw the line here, we will never be able to draw this line," Daschle said.

Senate parliamentary rules allow a filibuster to be maintained with just 41 votes. Democratic aides say Democrats have 44 of their 48 senators agreeing to keep a filibuster going, with Sens. John Breaux of Louisiana, Zell Miller of Georgia and Ben Nelson of Nebraska against a filibuster and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (news, bio, voting record) of Arkansas on the fence.

The longest traditional Senate filibuster in history belongs to recently retired Sen. Strom Thurmond (news, bio, voting record) of South Carolina, who spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes in opposition to civil rights legislation in 1957. Thurmond failed, and the bill eventually passed the Senate.

If you haven't heard about this Estrada guy until know and it doesn't seem like it could be that important or you would have, please keep reading.
It's important...Promise :-)

This just in from Move On.

You can look up your reps to call and thank them (Congressmerge -- anyone know of a better lookup service?)

In any case: do it now guys! Thanks!

Responding to thousands of our calls, Democrats have just launched
a filibuster* to prevent the confirmation of Miguel Estrada to
America's second-highest court. This filibuster is the first sign
of real resistance to extremism in Congress and the White House...

Please call your Senators now, at:

Senator Feinstein (D)
Local Phone: 310-914-7300
DC Phone: 202-224-3841

Senator Boxer (D)
Local Phone: 415-403-0100
DC Phone: 202-224-3553

If your Senator is a Democrat, say:

"Thank you for supporting the filibuster
to block the Estrada nomination.
Please speak out on the Senate floor."

If your Senator is a Republican, say:

"Please support the filibuster to block
the Estrada nomination."

A story on the filibuster in today's New York Times is at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/12/politics/12ESTR.html

For more information on Estrada, there's a good fact sheet at:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=7795

* For more information on filibusters, see our recent bulletin at:
http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin11.html

Responding to thousands of our calls, Democrats have just launched
a filibuster* to prevent the confirmation of Miguel Estrada to
America's second-highest court. This filibuster is the first sign
of real resistance to extremism in Congress and the White House.

Weíve got to support this filibuster.

Please call your Senators now, at:

Senator Feinstein (D)
Local Phone: 310-914-7300
DC Phone: 202-224-3841

Senator Boxer (D)
Local Phone: 415-403-0100
DC Phone: 202-224-3553

If your Senator is a Democrat, say:

"Thank you for supporting the filibuster to block the Estrada
nomination. Please speak out on the Senate floor."

If your Senator is a Republican, say:

"Please support the filibuster to block the Estrada nomination."

If you are asked why you support the filibuster, make some of the
following points in your own words:

- Estrada has hidden his views on the law from the public;
- Estrada has a reputation as a right-wing extremist;
- The Senate must be informed to advise and consent on nominations.

Please let us know you're making your calls, at:

http://www.moveon.org/callmade2.html

The filibuster is a bold move -- playing the Senate's ultimate ace --
and bold moves carry big risks. This filibuster is now the battle line
on which everything we care about depends. Republicans will make every
effort to peel Dems away from the filibuster.

If they succeed, we're screwed. It's that simple. If the Dems cave
in here, the right wing will steamroller us on every issue, gutting
environmental protections, giving enormous new tax breaks to the rich
while the economy tanks, and eviscerating our civil rights.

But if the filibuster succeeds, it will be a resounding victory, giving
us a real chance to protect the things that matter to us. It could
even embolden the Democrats to challenge the White House's war plans.

Six weeks ago, nobody thought we'd get this far. Yet more than
18,000 MoveOn members have called since last week in support of the
filibuster. Hundreds of us vistited Senate offices a month ago.
Senators are telling each other what a difference MoveOn is making.
Our work is paying off and we've got to keep it up.

Please make your calls today. Please call again, even if you've called
before.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

--The MoveOn Team
Carrie, Eli, Joan, Peter, Wes, Zack
February 12, 2003

P.S.:

A story on the filibuster in today's New York Times is at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/12/politics/12ESTR.html

For more information on Estrada, there's a good fact sheet at:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=7795

* For more information on filibusters, see our recent bulletin at:
http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin11.html

Here's a list of organizations opposing the Estrada nomination:

ADA Watch/National Coalition for Disability Rights
AFL-CIO
Alliance for Justice
American Association of University Women
Americans for Democratic Action
Congressional Hispanic Caucus
Congressional Black Caucus
Earthjustice
Feminist Majority
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
MoveOn.org
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
NARAL Pro-Choice America
National Council of Jewish Women
National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association
National Fair Housing Alliance
National Organization for Women
National Partnership for Women and Families
National Women's Law Center
People For the American Way
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund
Sierra Club
Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project
United Auto Workers
Working Assets
________________