• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal Judicial Vacancies: The Trial Courts

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,672
Reaction score
6,245
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
These pair of links highlight a growing problem that surprisingly no one seems to pay attention to: that there are currently a record number of federal court vacancies and very few judicial nominees being appointed to fill these seats.

Federal Judicial Vacancies: The Trial Courts | Brennan Center for Justice

Court Vacancies | Why Courts Matter

now i believe the job of filling judicial vacancys is one of the senates responsibility's. so my question is what is going on?
Apparently the President is not capable of appointing nominees whom the Senate wishes to confirm.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,672
Reaction score
6,245
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Apparently the President is not capable of appointing nominees whom the Senate wishes to confirm.
is it also the reponsibility of the individual senators to nominate judicial candidates to fill empty judges seats in their states
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
is it also the reponsibility of the individual senators to nominate judicial candidates to fill empty judges seats in their states
Look, so long as O is President, vacancies are better.
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So why are you in favor of a broken judicary that is struggling with increased case loads and not enough judges to handle them all
Because I don't want Obama appointees with life tenure.
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
This has been a problem since at least Reagan (and possibly longer), through every President and through every Congress.

Essentially, too many people... some in this thread, even... willing to sacrifice the overall running and good of the country over petty partisanship.
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This has been a problem since at least Reagan (and possibly longer), through every President and through every Congress.

Essentially, too many people... some in this thread, even... willing to sacrifice the overall running and good of the country over petty partisanship.
It isn't petty partisanship, it's a concern for the future welfare of the country.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,508
Reaction score
37,760
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Just because you don't like Obamas political idealogy Is not a good reason of preventing judicial nominees from being appointed.
Actually, it is one of the best. These appointments tend to have very long term consequences. While the president indeed has the power to appoint anyone, that does not mean that they must be approved. Before you go into the "injustice" of using political ploys and bending "the rules", consider how many House bills make it to the Senate floor for a vote.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,672
Reaction score
6,245
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Actually, it is one of the best. These appointments tend to have very long term consequences. While the president indeed has the power to appoint anyone, that does not mean that they must be approved. Before you go into the "injustice" of using political ploys and bending "the rules", consider how many House bills make it to the Senate floor for a vote.

But isn't one of the senates jobs to give advice and consent to the president over judicial appointees, maybe advising the president to consider appointing someone that senator recommended?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,508
Reaction score
37,760
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
But isn't one of the senates jobs to give advice and consent to the president over judicial appointees, maybe advising the president to consider appointing someone that senator recommended?
Absent consent, the advice is quite clear - appoint someone else. ;)
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
61,138
Reaction score
29,014
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
It isn't petty partisanship, it's a concern for the future welfare of the country.

You never said nor asked about one of the potential appointees therefore know nothing of them at all. You just threw them in the trash because of who the president is. That is pretty much the very definition of petty partisanship.
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Just because you don't like Obamas political idealogy Is not a good reason of preventing judicial nominees from being appointed.
Having judges on the bench who share O's legal philosophy would de disastrous for the country for decades.
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Just because you don't like Obamas political idealogy Is not a good reason of preventing judicial nominees from being appointed.
Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, two words: Manual Estrada.
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
You never said nor asked about one of the potential appointees therefore know nothing of them at all. You just threw them in the trash because of who the president is. That is pretty much the very definition of petty partisanship.
I know about a number of the district court nominees. But do you really lack confidence in O's ability to identify lawyers who adhere to his judicial philosophy?
 

wbcoleman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
431
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
And doing nothing makes a broken judicial system even worse.
What's "broken" about the judicial system, aside from the stream of horrific decisions emanating from the circuit courts and from SCOTUS?
 
Top Bottom