Legalities
Life, Politics and the Law From ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg
Jan Crawford Greenburg is a correspondent for ABC News' bureau in Washington DC. She covers politics, the Supreme Court and provides legal analysis for ABC News. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago's law school and is a member of the New York bar.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
The Fight Over Miguel Estrada Continues
July 13, 2009 11:54 AM
It's striking to see both sides continue to fight over Miguel Estrada -- but we just got a new argument from Pat Leahy. Graham was making the point that Estrada should have been confirmed to the D.C Circuit (and would then have been the first Hispanic Justice, nominated by George Bush).
After he complained about the Democratic filibuster, Leahy tried to blame Republicans for failing to get him confirmed when they had a majority -- and then tried to blame Estrada himself, for not answering questions because he may have been "distracted" by a high-paying job offer.
??? Did I hear that right?
Estrada had (and has) a high-paying job, at Gibson Dunn, which he was willing to leave to go on the federal bench. And, regardless, Estrada answered questions every bit as thoroughly as John Roberts, who was confirmed to the DC Circuit--despite his not turning over the same DOJ documents the Judiciary Committee wanted from Estrada.
Estrada was blocked by Democrats for one reason -- the same reason they blocked Bush's other minority and women nominees: They knew he would be on the short list for the Supreme Court if confirmed. And they knew it's a lot easier to block a nominee at the appeals court level, when no one is paying as much attention as the do to the Supreme Court. (Republicans are seeing that now with Sotomayor.) It was a deliberate, thought-through strategy.
But Leahy is right to blame Republicans: If Majority Leader Bill Frist had shown real leadership, he would never have allowed a Democratic majority to achieve the first-ever filibusters of appeals court nominees. If Trent Lott had been majority leader, Estrada would have been confirmed. And odds are, it would be Miguel Estrada, not Sotomayor, who would be the first Hispanic Justice on the Supreme Court.
July 13, 2009 | Permalink | User Comments (3)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
what would Lott have done differently?
Posted by: Doug T. | Jul 13, 2009 9:11:50 PM
He would have fought to get Miguel Estrada confirmed (and won). I think that's a great point.
Glad to see you back, Jan.
Posted by: JohnJ | Jul 13, 2009 9:48:42 PM
I too am curious what Trent Lott would have done differently than Bill Frist.
Is Greenburg referring to the Frist punt on the "nuclear option" to change Senate rules in regards to filibusters of Judicial nominees?
Posted by: Brennan | Jul 15, 2009 12:35:19 PM
Post a comment
