Fears of a radical makeover of the federal judiciary by President George Bush are unlikely to come to fruition, and even if they do, it is unlikely to have any immediate impact – thanks to power of a filibuster to block any potential radical right nominations and the fact that federal judges are appointed for life.
Numerous conservative values advocates have come out since the election calling for Bush to reinvent the judiciary, the body of the United States government that consistently rejects laws passed to reinforce conservative values as unconstitutional.
Then bad news for conservatives came from an expected corner – the heir apparent for influential role as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter.
At a press conference following his own re-election, the moderate Republican indicated earlier this week that any makeover of the judiciary was unlikely to be a radical one. "When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely," Specter said. "The president is well aware of what happened, when a bunch of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster .... and I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning."
Terms limits on the chairmanship required the current Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Orin Hatch (R-Utah), to step down, and as the senior Republican on the committee, Specter was expected to be next in line for the job – though his position is no longer certain after his statement regarding anti-abortion judges.
The evangelical right wing conservatives that are widely viewed as President George Bush’s core constituency, yet kept largely out of site during the campaign, immediately expressed their dissatisfaction with Specter, calling for the President to have someone else appointed head of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family, whose endorsement of Bush was prominently displayed on the president’s campaign Web site, suggested on his organization’s Web site that Specter, “would be wise to study all the exit polls coming out of Tuesday's election, which show unmistakably that moral values were the No. 1 thing voters considered at the polls. The people who put President Bush back in the White House and expanded the Republican majority in the Senate weren't voting for a party – they were voting for candidates who share their pro-family values.
"Those people are going to be heard from when somebody who does not share those values threatens to force his will upon a president who received more popular votes than any other man who has ever run for the White House."
It is widely reported that “moral values” were considered the key factor by those who voted for Bush, a fact generally accredited to the efforts of conservative activists such as Operation Rescue, an anti-abortion group that spent the three weeks leading into Election Day campaigning for Bush in Pennsylvania and Ohio, the state with which Bush won the election.
In a press release posted on Operation Rescue’s Web site, Troy Newman the organization’s president, called for Bush to appoint anti-abortionist judges.
"Mr. President, you have been given a mandate to end abortion in our nation by the American people who cast their votes for you," Newman said. "Please move forward aggressively to appoint pro-life federal judges, and when the time comes, appoint Supreme Court justices that will strike down the scourge of Roe v. Wade."
The evangelicals want conservative judges appointed in any position that comes open in the next four years – from the Supreme Court on down – in an attempt to turn back the tide on a number of progressive issues ranging from abortion to gay rights, and of course, obscenity.
The current nine-member Supreme Court is generally considered to have a conservative edge, yet evangelicals anticipate that Bush will be able to stack the court further in the conservatives favor as some analysts suggesting Bush will be able to appoint as many as four Supreme Court Justices.
Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are considered the liberals of the court, with Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Sandra Day O’Conner, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Antonin Scalia representing the conservative branch of the court.
Oddly enough, only two of the current justices were appointed by a Democrat. Ginsburg and Breyer were both appointed by Bill Clinton.
The other seven justices were appointed by Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush, the current president’s father.
The president can only appoint justices when a vacancy opens through the retirement or death of an existing member of the nation’s highest court.
The justice most likely to be replaced soon is Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who is currently undergoing treatment and chemotherapy for thyroid cancer.
Any appointment Bush names to the Supreme Court is unlikely to be more conservative than Rehnquist, who was originally appointed to the court by Nixon and elevated to Chief Justice by Ronald Reagan, and is considered one of the most conservative members of the court.
Stevens and O’Connor are considered likely to retire during Bush’s second term.
And under the Supreme Court, there are over 800 U.S. District and appeals court seats that must be maintained – with each appointment lasting the duration of the appointee’s life, unless they voluntarily step down, or are removed for the bench through an act of Congress.
There are approximately 50 seats in the federal judiciary that are currently open.
Conservative activists were particularly riled that the Senate Democrats blocked ten of Bush’s judicial appointments during his first term, despite the fact that 203 of the Bush’s appointments were confirmed.
The ten nominations that were blocked during Bush’s first term were considered to be too extreme in regards to their conservative views, leading Democrats to organize filibusters to block their nominations.
A filibuster is a legislative process wherein senators draw out a debate for an extended period of time, effectively preventing a vote on an issue or vote. The only way to force a vote is to garner support for one from three-fifths of the Senate, or 60 senators.
Even with the gains the Republican Party made in Senate, and supposing that all Republicans agreed to vote down the party line, they only have 55 Senators, not enough to force a cloture, as the majority required to force a vote is known.
In summary, the checks and balances put into place by our forefathers work.
