May 11, 2018

After 8 years, we finally got our 7th Circuit judge — as the Senate votes in defiance of Tammy Baldwin.

The Wisconsin State Journal reports:
The Senate voted along party lines to confirm Milwaukee attorney Michael Brennan to fill an opening on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The tally was 49-46. The seat has been open for more than eight years, the longest ever for the nation’s appellate courts.

The Senate gives lawmakers a chance to weigh in on a judicial nominee from their home state by submitting a blue-colored form called the “blue slip.” A positive blue slip signals the Senate to move forward with the nomination process. A negative blue slip, or withholding it altogether, signals a senator’s objection and almost always stalls the nomination.

Until this year, it had been nearly three decades since the Senate confirmed a judge without two positive blue slips. Brennan’s confirmation marked the second time it has happened this year. Baldwin declined to return her blue slip.

The move to go ahead with a hearing for Brennan and a vote on the floor had Democrats complaining that Republicans were eroding one of the few remaining customs in the Senate that forced consultation on judicial nominations.

“I’d admonish my friends on the other side of the aisle, this is a very dangerous road you’re treading,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “As everyone knows, the winds of political change blow swiftly in America. The minority one day is the majority the next.”...

For Democrats, it was particularly galling that Republican Sen. Ron Johnson used his blue slip to object to Obama nominee Victoria Nourse to serve on the 7th Circuit....

“How is Sen. Baldwin’s right to consult on judges for her state any less important than Sen. Johnson’s?” Schumer said. “It’s mind-bending hypocrisy. It’s an appalling double standard.”
Here's the post I wrote back in 2010, when Obama nominated Nourse, who was, like me at the time, a Wisconsin Law School professor. Here's a National Review article by Ed Whelan from 2011, "The Blue-Slip Privilege and Seventh Circuit Nominee Victoria Nourse":
As I’ve made clear, I’m no fan of the Senate’s blue-slip policy, the internal Senate procedure that gives senators in a particular state special power to obstruct executive-branch and judicial nominations in their state. I’m especially not an admirer of the expanded version of the blue-slip policy that Democrats extracted from then-chairman Specter in the Bush 43 years—which gave individual senators an effective veto even over federal appellate judgeships associated with their states (even though the laws do not assign appellate judgeships by state and the caseload of an appellate judge has no more connection to one state than to any other in a circuit). As I explained at the end of the Bush 41 presidency, “This Senate Republican conferral of extraordinary leverage on obstructionist Democrats explains, for example, why a Fourth Circuit seat regarded as belonging to Maryland has been vacant throughout Bush’s presidency—and why so many other seats were filled with compromise candidates.”
I put the boldface on "expanded version" because of the stress — in the new article — on the idea of the Senate's "customs."

68 comments:

Darkisland said...

More winning!

Not tired yet.

Don't expect to be anytime soon

John Henry

Jon Burack said...

Point well taken on the expanded nature of this "custom," which even in its original form makes little sense.

As to Schumer warning of how winds can change, the irony is rich. Democrats now are wailing away about how "America" went back on its word, a word never given to approve what was a mere presidential "commitment" to Iran in a nuclear deal that should have been a (defeated) treaty. At the time Obama did this, the same warning was often issued. Now, lo, it has come to pass. Live by the winds of change, Chuck, die by them. You are right at last.

Mike Sylwester said...

It's great that these obstructionist rules in the Senate are being revoked.

It's part of making America great again.

Bad Lieutenant said...

JH,

Power naps. If you keep it to 20 minutes at a time, you probably won't miss another great-making win for America by PDJT. But I'd be careful about 21.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Blogger Jon Burack said...
Point well taken on the expanded nature of this "custom," which even in its original form makes little sense.


In short words:

Bush nice. Bush weak.

MayBee said...

I get Tammy Duckworth and Tammy Baldwin mixed up. How can there be two Tammys from one state? It's not even a name in wide circulation these days.

the 4chan Guy who reads Althouse said...

Blue slips sound cool and shit, but they are nowhere as cool as the Hudsucker Proxy Blue Letter.

Kevin said...

Like many things, customs once designed to curb the most egregious abuses are eventually used in petty arguments and then discarded when the normal flow of work can no longer be supported.

We don't have an opposition party in a two party system. We have an active #Resistance, whose intent is to nullify an election.

It isn't McConnell who's changing the Senate when every vote on every issue has become a party-line affair.

roesch/voltaire said...

Republican obstruction worked for six years against the Obama appointment so now we get one little no from Tammy.

Sebastian said...

"eroding one of the few remaining customs in the Senate that forced consultation on judicial nominations"

You mean, like, the way Harry Reid maintained regular order by consulting the minority, working through committees, and passing a proper budget?

Wince said...

Tammy, Tammy, Tammy's not in love.

MadisonMan said...

8 years! I don't even remember who he's replacing.

Tammy Duckworth is not from Wisconsin.

Ignorance is Bliss said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ignorance is Bliss said...

Ignorance is Bliss said...
roesch/voltaire said...

Republican obstruction worked for six years against the Obama appointment so now we get one little no from Tammy.

Republicans weren't obstructing. They were resisting. Even people not wearing genitalia hats can resist.

traditionalguy said...

OK. The real question will be the Kennedy and Ginsberg replacements. Whom shall they be? Michael Cohen can do the job. He would fix the Court for President Trump.

Mike Sylwester said...

The real question will be the Kennedy and Ginsberg replacements. Whom shall they be? Michael Cohen can do the job.

The Trump presidency has been a lot of laughs.

Nominating Michael Cohen to the Supreme Court would be the best laugh ever.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

traditionalguy said...

OK. The real question will be the Kennedy and Ginsberg replacements.

How about Kim Jong Un? Offer him a position on the Supreme Court in exchange for giving up power in North Korea. Trump gets to add Korean Reunification to his resume, while Kim Jong Un gets to retain unaccountable dictatorial powers for life. Win-win!

I'm Full of Soup said...

Trump is actually proving the job of the presidency is not that hard contrary to how the previous presidents and their lackeys have acted. Common sense is quite an asset.

David Begley said...

If Baldwin would have nominated Althouse, she would have sailed through!

Judge Althouse.

Mike in Keller said...

Mitch McConnell is famous for loving the Senate rules. Sadly, those rules he so loves are old rules, not reflective of the current state of affairs. Would that Mitch would break some more rules, recognizing that the Senate he used to love no longer exists, and it's way past the time for performing on the many promises, not yet fulfilled, that Republicans made in order to get me to vote for them.

tcrosse said...

Nominating Michael Cohen to the Supreme Court would be the best laugh ever.

Just so long as it's the right Michael Cohen.

David Begley said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BarrySanders20 said...

IIB says: "How about Kim Jong Un?" for SCOTUS.

According to my google machine, there are no official qualifications for becoming a Supreme Court justice. The Constitution spells out age, citizenship and residency requirements for becoming president of the United States or a member of Congress but mentions no rules for joining the nation's highest court.

David Begley said...

Good thing she never got confirmed. Check out her latest law review article.

Victoria F. Nourse, Reclaiming the Constitutional Text from Originalism: The Case of Executive Power, 106 Cal. L. Rev. 1-44 (2018). [HEIN] [W] [SSRN] [Gtown Law] [WWW]

My title: How to accomplish liberal political policies via the Executive. Or, why stop with the Iran deal and DACA?

Birkel said...

The retirement BAMN of RBG would make for a truly memorable fall.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

If Trump does nominate Kim Jong Un, and the Democrats try to filibuster, the Republican could use the nuclear option. Kim could even supply the nukes!

gilbar said...

"How can there be two Tammys from one state?"
illinois only Thinks that wisconsin and illinois are one state;
in reality, they're each subsets of upper michigan

rehajm said...

Republicans weren't obstructing. They were resisting.

Remember under Obama when Congress was supposed to approve and pass whatever he wanted to do? Obviously Chuck doesn't...

readering said...

Nominate Cohen? Google Fortas and Miers. Nothing new but Congress learns.

Birkel said...

readering, like most Leftist Collectivists is humor impaired.

Dad29 said...

Waiting for Giampietro........tick, tock, tick, tock.....

Amadeus 48 said...

Tammy Duckworth is such a zero that she could be from any state. Just think of her as the senator from the Democratic Party. She does whatever Dick Durbin tells her to do.

MayBee said...

Tammy Duckworth is not from Wisconsin.

Is she not? Interesting. I thought she was, but it must be Tammy Baldwin. All I really know about Duckworth is that she lost her leg(s?) in combat and wants to bring her baby to the Senate floor. I guess all I know about Baldwin is that she's named Tammy and apparently not Tammy Duckworth.

Anonymous said...

I think that many of the Senates rules need to be updated. The blue slip veto of a nominee is like making someone king who should not be. Yes there will be a time when it works to the advantage of the Dems, but that's the way the game is played. Obstruction by Senate rule is not good for anyone.

Two-eyed Jack said...

This is part of the chain of events set off by the end of the Civil War in the Reagan years. Following the military phase (1861-1865), we had the legislative phase (1865-1965), and then the judicial phase (1965-1985). During the long legislative phase we had parties that were very odd coalitions of interests. The Senate was under the control of aged Southern Senate committee chairmen, who created a lot of "traditions."

With the end of the war, during the Reagan administration, we saw a realignment to more normal parties with a clear ideological division. All of the traditions and bipartisanship have gradually disappeared as ideological alignment has made cross-party coalitions close to impossible. Now bills with total party alignment are called bi-partisan if a Manchin or Collins can be induced to tag along. Talk of "tradition" is all posturing now.

Amadeus 48 said...

The old Senate customs, which were real, harkened back to the days of Jim Crow, when the segregationists were an important part of the Democratic national coalition. That is how the Democrats kept the segregationists on board. Take a good, hard look at such Democratic heroes as Robert Byrd, Harry Byrd, J. William Fulbright, Sam Ervin, George Smathers, Richard Russell, and Russell Long, and be prepared to be appalled.

The Senate can't get rid of these vestiges of the Jim Crow era fast enough.

Query: Is identity politics bringing back segregation? What about those African-American dorms and student centers at state universities? Separate but equal?

rcocean said...

Get rid of blue slips for Appeals Court. Never made any sense anyway. Why should a Senator from Oregon be able to stop any nominee to the 9th circuit - which covers almost the whole USA.

All these BS rules, aren't written in stone, and they weren't abused in the past.

We elect the POTUS to nominate judges, ONE obscure senator shouldn't be allowed to veto the process. I wonder why Trump doesn't fight back against the Senate their obstructionist attitudes. There must be something these assholes need from the Executive branch.

rcocean said...

Blue Slips have nothing to do with Jim Crow. Give the race baiting a rest.

Judas Priest, today the ultimate winning argument in EVERY situation is "That's Racist" or sexist or whatever-ist.

Intellectual bankruptcy.

Big Mike said...

If Tammy Baldwin is against him, Brennan must be pretty damned good.

Rick said...

Nominating Michael Cohen to the Supreme Court would be the best laugh ever.

There is no way that could top Scaramucci on Bannon.

Achilles said...

Rick said...
Nominating Michael Cohen to the Supreme Court would be the best laugh ever.

There is no way that could top Scaramucci on Bannon.

Manafort is currently unemployed.

Sal said...

Baldwin declined to return her blue slip.

In the same spirit as the Wisconsin flee-baggers.

Yancey Ward said...

I didn't read it yesterday, but there was an essay from Slate or Salon posted on RealClearPolitics where the title suggested the writer wanted Democrats to pack the Supreme Court the first chance they got. So, you really can't top the Democrats in this tit for tat. Get rid of the of filibuster and blueslips altogether if you are a Republican Senator- you won't be allowed to use them in the future anyway.

langford peel said...


"Query: Is identity politics bringing back segregation? What about those African-American dorms and student centers at state universities? Separate but equal?"

Yes and it is wonderful.

The African American community was so much more vibrant and cohesive when they had their own schools and enclaves in big cities. Since the police force is so violent and racist they should have their own separate tribal police much like the native Americans do.

Then we would truly have peace. Quiet. Law and Order.

Seeing Red said...

With the end of the war, during the Reagan administration, we saw a realignment to more normal parties with a clear ideological division. All of the traditions and bipartisanship have gradually disappeared as ideological alignment has made cross-party coalitions close to impossible. Now bills with total party alignment are called bi-partisan if a Manchin or Collins can be induced to tag along. Talk of "tradition" is all posturing now.



Well, when one now has to fight for control instead of one side or the other having control for 30-40 years at a stretch, things get nasty.

Goldenpause said...

Giving an individual senator a practical veto over federal judges in "his/her" state always was a truly terrible idea. Maybe less so when senators were elected by their state legislatures, but still a terrible idea. Thank you Harry Reid, for making this additional change in Senate practice possible.

Curious George said...

"MayBee said...
Is she not? Interesting. I thought she was, but it must be Tammy Baldwin. All I really know about Duckworth is that she lost her leg(s?) in combat and wants to bring her baby to the Senate floor. I guess all I know about Baldwin is that she's named Tammy and apparently not Tammy Duckworth."

Tammy Baldwin is the first lesbian Senator. She's a do-nothing idiot, but she sure can
dance.

Gahrie said...

There are a bunch of opening on the 9th circuit, and at least one more opening soon. If Trump can fill those with orginalists he can make a huge impact for decades to come.

Gahrie said...

Nominating Michael Cohen to the Supreme Court would be the best laugh ever.

I'd like to see Trump nominate Ted Cruz. If not for the next spot open then definitely the one after that.

Static Ping said...

Traditions are only useful if both sides honor them in good faith. That good faith was destroyed when Harry Reid broke tradition with the D.C. circuit court, and the Senate Democrats have further broke tradition by giving Trump's nominees such a hard time without due cause. There is no reason for Republicans to believe that the lost traditions would survive as soon as they were inconvenient to the Democrats.

tcrosse said...

I'd like to see Trump nominate Ted Cruz

The Senate would be glad to confirm. just to get rid of him.

Jim at said...

Getting rid of the blue slips is long, long overdue.

The less power given to our dimbulbs - Cantwell and Murray - the better.

Jim at said...

Republican obstruction worked for six years against the Obama appointment so now we get one little no from Tammy. - R/V

Republicans captured the Senate in 2014. Try again.

Leora said...

I too have been disturbed that there are two women senators named Tammy. It's not like it's a common name. Thanks to this comment thread for allowing me once and for all to distinguish the lesbian from Wisconsin from the war hero and mother from Illinois, both of whom vote the wrong way for my preferences.

Achilles said...

Republicans should just do away with the filibuster.

There are 30 red states and 20 blue states. That is worst case.

Democrats will not have a senate majority for a generation. The filibuster just gives assholes like Flake and McCain power.

MayBee said...

Curious George- Thanks!?? Hahahahaha

Big Mike said...

@Curious George, if the stories about Barbara Mikulski are true then your statement about Tammy Baldwin needs to be amended to to “first openly lesbian Senator.”

Anonymous said...

"The move to go ahead with a hearing for Brennan and a vote on the floor had Democrats complaining that Republicans were eroding one of the few remaining customs in the Senate that forced consultation on judicial nominations."

How dare those Republicans "erode a custom of the Senate"!?! Dont' they know only Democrats get to do that!!!

Ha ha ha!

Enjoy the new rules, Democrats.

Oh, and it's not "consultation" when a Senator refuses to even return a Blue Slip with her issues with the nominee laid out, it's just obstructionism.

Harry Reid and the Dems established in Dec 2013 that they weren't going to allow Republicans to engage in effective obstruction while in the minority.

That's fine. Now the GOP is letting Democrats know that the rule is the same for them. And that's more than fine, that's absolutely wonderful!

Anonymous said...

“How is Sen. Baldwin’s right to consult on judges for her state any less important than Sen. Johnson’s?” Schumer said. “It’s mind-bending hypocrisy. It’s an appalling double standard.”


1: She's a Democrat, so she has nothing worthwhile to say

2: In 2013 Democrats voted to end judicial filibusters. Chuck and Tammy both voted in favor of taking away from Republicans a power that Democrats had used all through Bush 43's term.

The only "appalling double standard" would be to let the Democrats keep on obstructing, now that they're in the minority

Anonymous said...

Static Ping said...
Traditions are only useful if both sides honor them in good faith

Ding, ding, ding!

Here, let me help you, Lefties: "Good faith" is defined by your willingness to lose when the rules go against you./

Since there's no evidence you have any good faith, and lots of evidence you don't, it would be utterly imbecilic for the GOP to show good faith towards you, ever, on anything.

Spend a couple of years losing, and accepting your loses, and then we'll talk about the possibility of good faith

narayanan said...

-Nominating Michael Cohen to the Supreme Court would be the best laugh ever.
-Just so long as it's the right Michael Cohen.

Amusing to have present different Michael Cohen for each day of circus.

Michael McNeil said...

If Trump does nominate Kim Jong Un, and the Democrats try to filibuster, the Republican could use the nuclear option. Kim could even supply the nukes!

Ha ha. Actually, though, the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations was eliminated by Senate rules change last year. That's how Gorsuch got confirmed.

mikee said...

So if an appellate court nominee is blocked by a Senator's withheld blue slip in their home state, can the nominee move to another state still in that circuit, with more amenable Senators, and eliminate that Senatorial veto? If not, why not?

Michael K said...

Blogger tcrosse said...
I'd like to see Trump nominate Ted Cruz

The Senate would be glad to confirm. just to get rid of him.


I actually think that would be a better fit for him than Senate or President.

Michael K said...

I still get angry when I think about how Democrats filibustered both Janice Rogers Brown and Miguel Estrada so that they would be available for Bush to appoint the fist black woman and the first Hispanic to the Court.

I' d still like to see her appointed even though she is too old now. She still has ten good years or more.

Pugsley the Pug said...

If this hadn’t been done now, as soon as the Dems wrest control of the Senate and White House, they will look at the minority side of the aisle, smile an evil smile, say “SUCKERS!!!!!” and toss that blue slip rule into the trash can as the multitude of judicial vacancies that they were blocking for years would be filled by liberal ideologicals with no regard for the Constitution or the rule of law and effectively turn this country into a one party autocracy with a thought police controlling us all. That is the real legacy of the corrupt Harry Reid as he slowly started the dismantling of the Senate rules for the benefit of the Dems, especially during the Obama era.

JAORE said...

Schummer warns..... it is to laugh.

Does ANYONE think, should the D Party prevail, that Chuck would respect old traditions to the detriment of his party?

Joe said...

Let me get this straight; the same champions of the popular election of the US president believe that a minority of two can veto the vote of the majority.