Bush versus Clinton's obstructed judicial nominees

  I've been hearing a lot about Bush re nominating his justices that were turned downed previously. Talk of the nuclear option and stuff.

  On the news I have seen a lot of clips where Bush talks about how the dems are being obstructionist, and didn't Daschle at least partly get the axe over this??

  But what I have NOT heard on the news, but really wonder is how the numbers of nominees and slots that Clinton had to fill that were not filled or nominees obstructed by the republicans, stack up against the ones Bush has not been able to push through.

   I don't recall exactly, it's been a while, but it seems to me that during the Clinton years he had a large number of judicial slots that were either obstructed or somehow left unfilled.

    Can anybody help me with a link or something to a comparison?
   

•  Try this from

  Center for Investigative Reporting

  by rba on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 04:59:33 PM PDT

•  The comparative figures

  This question was recently brought up in the Atlanta Journal and Constitution.  No definitive answer was provided, as a lot apparently depends upon what level of the court system you are talking about, but the article suggested looking here:

  http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL31635.pdf

  by Symbiotic on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 05:06:01 PM PDT

•  Terry Gross interviewed

  a rep from People for the American Way on "Fresh Air" today.  I didn't get his name, but one of his points was that 204 of 214 (or perhaps it's 214 or 224) of Bush's federal court nominations have been confirmed, whereas 30% of Clinton's were held up in Committee, never making it to the Senate floor for confirmation.  I don't know the actual number, but there were something like 350 vacancies in the federal courts when W took office, and clearly many of those have been filled now. The PFAW person was making the case that the Federalist Society is seeking to take over and remake the courts, sending us back to pre-New Deal days.  Which we know.  

  by Bluebirder on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 05:34:37 PM PDT

  •  Orrin Hatch

    This needs to be part of ANY response to charges of Obstructionism.  Orrin Hatch as chair of the Judiciary committee was successful in denying a floor vote to a large percentage of Clinton's nominees.  Notice the phrase "an up or down floor vote"... that conveniently leaves out an up or down committee vote.  ANY statement should include at least one sentence such as "Ask Orrin Hatch how many nominees he was able to stifle."

    by WI Deadhead on Tue Feb 15, 2005 at 07:44:42 PM PDT