Skip to main content

President Barack Obama delivers a statement announcing the nomination of three candidates for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in the Rose Garden of the White House, June 4, 2013. Nominees from left are: Robert Leon Wilkins,

The hope of many legal advocacy groups that President Obama would focus on fixing the judicial vacancies crisis with a flood of nominations now that the filibuster is gone isn't likely to be realized. President Obama and his administration tell Talking Points Memo that a significant obstacle still exists, and they won't push the issue. That obstacle, however, is easily overcome.
The blue slip is an old tradition, dating back to at least 1917, that lets senators have a say on which judges are appointed to courts in their home state. The way it works is that when a judge is nominated, the Judiciary Committee sends a "blue slip" to home state senators seeking their approval. If they sign off, the committee moves forward with the nomination. If one or both of them disapproves or withholds the blue slip, the nomination tends to grind to a halt.

The White House contends that the blue slip policy remains an impediment to appointing judges. Given the Senate's adherence to the tradition, Obama prefers not to nominate individuals and put them through the tough process unless they're pre-approved by home state senators. Most of the 42 district and appellate court vacancies without nominees are in states with GOP senators. In Texas, for instance, there are seven judicial vacancies with no nominees.

The blue slip is just a tradition, a tradition that Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) ignored when he chaired the Judiciary Committee. When Democrats regained the majority and Sen. Patrick Leahy took over, he restored it, but he seems open to change, just as he was on the nuclear option.
"I assume no one will abuse the blue slip process like some have abused the use of the filibuster to block judicial nominees on the floor of the Senate," Leahy said. "As long as the blue slip process is not being abused by home state senators, then I will see no reason to change that tradition."
"As long as" isn't "I won't change it." Leahy was extremely reluctant to change Senate rules on the filibuster of nominees until Republicans pushed him over the edge. His willingness to change his mind on the filibuster portends a willingness to change his mind on the blue slip. That's not an obstacle.

This is a fight President Obama should take on, because it's both one he could win and because judicial vacancies really are a crisis. He can start with those seven vacancies in Texas.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 08:33 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  In finally changing the filibuster rules (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EricS, phonegery, Buckeye Nut Schell

    after threatening repeatedly to do so, our side finally crossed our own Rubicon. So many of our Democratic Senators were reluctant to do so because of this thing called tradition. There was also the fear that we would lose the ability to similarly obstruct the Republicans if we find ourselves in the minority, ignoring the fact that our side is of less temperament to do so than the other side, and that the other side would have no hesitation about changing the rules to stop us.

    We've crossed that line in the sand once, so it will be so much easier to do so again if need be. But because we've proved we have the guts to do so, it may not be necessary to do so. The other side may decide that it may be a good idea not to call our bluff, because we aren't bluffing any more.

    I'm not opposed to filibustering or blue carding to delay to get more time for debate. But doing this to stop debate in the name of preserving democratic institutions??????

    It's time to reform the whole process.

    Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

    by RhodeIslandAspie on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 08:45:41 AM PST

  •  Dems need to tie this to the shutdowns (8+ / 0-)

    Both the one we just had and the one we're about to have.

    The Republicans are pushing for another shutdown for the same reason they're blocking appointments:  Because they hate, hate, hate the Democrats and will do anything to stop them.  Period.

    The shutdowns are a very visible example of GOP governing malfeasance.  Let's make sure everyone sees that they are part of the GOP continuum of malfeasance.

    Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

    by Phoenix Woman on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 08:50:28 AM PST

    •  PW - there won't be another one (0+ / 0-)

      The GOP went from being down 8 points in the CNN 2014 generic House ballot, just after the shutdown, to being up 2% in the same poll a month later, a 10 point swing. There will be no more shutdowns prior to the midterms. The GOP thinks they have the momentum because of the rocky start of the ACA rollout and they don't want to change that.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 07:13:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  "Heres the blue slip. You can sign it. Or eat it." (2+ / 0-)
    •  "Here's the blue slip. If it isn't returned (0+ / 0-)

      within ten business days, your approval of the nominee will be presumed and the nomination will go forward.

      If you have substantive objections to the nominee, please forward them within the ten days to the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, together with a list of the witnesses whom the committee should call to substantiate those objections.

      Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation."

  •  Reid should send WHITE slips. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wilderness voice

    And have it say right on them, we actually don't give a shit what you think, but here, asshole. :)

  •  Big Whup (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rainmanjr

    Blue slips only apply to those judgeships that exist at the State level, i.e. District. They don't apply to multi-state Circuit judges or no-State DC Circuit or Federal Circuit and it is at that appeal level that the rubber really hits the road.

    The GOP might still try to gum up the works at the District level but in the nature of things can get little payoff in doing so. Because most of the work at that level is drug and federal fraud cases and contracts and whatever all of which have importance for local GOP law-n-order and business base. There is just no juice being totally obstrutionist at that level when the individual Senator has lost control of the process at the Circuit level.

    You don't block Obama's agenda by keeping some District spots open in Texas, not in any important regard.

    SocSec dot.Defender at gmail.com - founder DK Social Security Defenders Group

    by Bruce Webb on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 09:38:38 AM PST

    •  Well the reasonable (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      northerntier, phonegery

      citizens of states with a republican senator deserve to have the local federal bench staffed with at least a few less ideological jurists.

      With the blue slip in place Obama's staff has to find judges who are fairly right wing in order to have any chance of getting past the blue slip barrier.

      Or alternatively the republicans might just block every appointment and leave the positions unfilled. But in that case they might be leaving them open for another 10 years so the end result is a case backlog in their own back yards.

      I hope Leahy kills it at the first sign of abuse. Then Obama's staff would have the freedom to simply choose qualified judges who are not necessarily batshit right wingers.

      •  The downsides of leaving those (0+ / 0-)

        seats open are less.

        In my opinion the main use of Blue Slips has been (Jesse Helms notorious use besides) has been as warning shots from minority Senators that they "must be taken seriously".

        Sure this time it is just a District Judge, but "I got clout and the next time it might be me filibustering your Circuit choice".

        Well under the new rules the possibilities of escalating are that much smaller. Of course the proof is in the pudding, if we see an escalation of blue slipping and other methods of obstruction than Leahy in the first case and Reid in the second may well have to take action. But this kind of looks too much like looking for the black cloud inside the silver lining for my tastes.

        Because just between you me and 999,998 other Kossacks too many progressives seem terminally afflicted with "Man we are just fucked! STILL and AGAIN"-itis and with symptoms that flare up with little or no apparent significant cause. Or even at what should be partial cures.

        At best this leads to defeatism and at worst to the mostly counterproductive 'Heighten the Contradictions' strategy.

        SocSec dot.Defender at gmail.com - founder DK Social Security Defenders Group

        by Bruce Webb on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 03:02:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Not correct, unfortunately (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Alice Olson, divineorder

      Circuit judges are are also subject to blue-slips, as they do have a home state or a duty station within the circuit. Previous judicial chairmen have sometime not applied this blue slip rule at the appellate level, but I'm pretty sure that Leahy does.

      "A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." - George Bernard Shaw

      by Drobin on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:24:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So 24 Senators have this privilege (0+ / 0-)

        two each for the 12 Districts and 78 do not?  or are the District Judges actually spread through their District and only meet for decisions?

        This is truly a question.

        SocSec dot.Defender at gmail.com - founder DK Social Security Defenders Group

        by Bruce Webb on Tue Dec 03, 2013 at 12:46:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Okay Google was my friend (0+ / 0-)

          http://en.wikipedia.org/...

          It looks like every State has at least one judge to contribute to their respective Circuit. On the other hand this means that more populous States have a disproportionate influence. With some anomalies. After all Tennessee has three to Ohio's two on the Sixth and Oklahoma has three where Colorado has one on the 10th. Meaning that in this case some Senators are more equal than Others.

          But I guess it is what it is.

          SocSec dot.Defender at gmail.com - founder DK Social Security Defenders Group

          by Bruce Webb on Tue Dec 03, 2013 at 12:56:22 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for the facts and your clarity. (0+ / 0-)

      Putting the fun back in dysfunctional.

      by hawkseye on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 01:05:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  blue slips (0+ / 0-)

      Blue slips apply to appeals court judges and district court judges.  The only courts where they wouldnt apply are D.C. district and appeals and Federal circuit appeals court.  All other district and appeals courts have judges chosen from the states in their circuit with a certain number allotted for each state.  For examine Alaska has 1 judgeship allotted on the 9th circuit appeals court so AK senators have to agree on that nominee before a hearing in committee.

  •  How many ridiculous "traditions"... (5+ / 0-)

    does it take to screw up a government? Frankly I'm amazed that this country has managed to get anything done with the seemingly endless procedural dodges available for obstruction.

    From the politicization of everything from judges to dogcatchers and the exaggerated importance of legislative minorities this country has all but ground to a halt.

    Republicans trumpet the benefits of democracy to the world but can't accept the results of elections at home. It's a pity their reverence for "the minority" doesn't extend to "the minorities" they habitually demonize and try to suppress.

    I'm so terribly sick of these hypocritical pricks.

    •  Things like the blue slip work fine if everybody (0+ / 0-)

      acts in a gentlemanly manner.  Which is in short supply of late, since there's been a breakdown of the basic consensus that the government should actually function.  In years past, this was something post parties agreed on.

  •  We desperately need those judges (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whaddaya

    in Texas.

    The wanker to common sense ratio in the courts is very askew.

    For real Texas Kaos, you want texaskaos.net, not .com. Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us

    by boadicea on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 11:03:38 AM PST

  •  Leahy is now in a position that Reid used to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RhodeIslandAspie, whaddaya

    occupy, of attempting to treat the Party of No as gentlemen whose word can be trusted. Reid did that only as long as he didn't have the votes to do otherwise, and as long as the Republicans did not act badly enough to get Reid those missing votes.

    Leahy now has the opportunity to ask for blue slips on all of the current nominees, and to go off like a volcano (again) when they are not forthcoming, and when Republicans lie brazenly about why.

    The kabuki is held to be essential to get material for next year's campaigns. We have to get the Republicans on the record with the next round of obstruction before we change the next rule they are abusing, and get the next small batch of nominees through.

    I can sort of imagine getting a few judges on the bench each time after a month or more of further obstruction and another rule change, and then all of the Democrats saying "Never mind" and just bringing them all in for up-or-down votes. But I can also imagine the process dragging out until after the midterms before we get any resolution.

    The tradition of unlimited debate in the Senate made some sense in an era of print media only, but the notion that only the Senate can host debate between Senators is ludicrous today. There is nothing like enough time for all of the bloviation required to take place in linear order.

    Morris King Udall (June 15, 1922 – December 12, 1998), better known as "Mo", was an American politician. He served as a Democratic U.S. Representative for Arizona from 1961 to 1991.

    Everything has been said but not everyone has said it.

    Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

    by Mokurai on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 11:36:35 AM PST

    •  Hatch set the "precedent" to ignore the Slip ... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Alice Olson, tle, eps62, Simplify, laird

      ... when it served him. Why are we agonizing over this?

      Fill the vacancies in the Courts of Appeal now. There are many, many qualified candidates waiting in the wings. One could start with district court judges from a two-Democrat state within the circuit or a state where the Republican Senator did not exercise the Blue Slip veto for that judge's lower level appointment.

      2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

      by TRPChicago on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:45:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I still do not understand why there hasn't been... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whaddaya

    a rash of nominations.  We should know already whether the Republicans intend to abuse this authority.  If they do, then ignore the damn slip and move forward.  If they don't, move forward.  

    There is no excuse we we are not getting judges confirmed as we speak (even if Harry had to extend the session).

    "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

    by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 01:19:56 PM PST

    •  The Times story says that Obama doesn't even (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Simplify, TofG

      submit nominations if the home state senator is going to refuse to sign the blue slip. He doesn't want to put nominees through the trouble of what will be a stuck nomination. Leahy says he won't change his approach until he sees abuse but he won't see any abuse unless Obama stands up to them and submits names to the committee.

      Alas, it seems to me there's no fight to be had until Obama is ready to fight.  

      The good we secure for ourselves is precarious and uncertain, is floating in mid-air, until it is secured for all of us and incorporated into our common life. Jane Addams

      by Alice Olson on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:58:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  First let's get the ones confirmed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SouthernLeveller

      who have been duly nominated, blue slipped, and are ready to be voted on. I think that's something like 52. In the meantime, Obama and Senate Judiciary can strategize and brainstorm lists for the remaining vacancies.

  •  Bye Bye Blue Slip (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whaddaya

    We shall see - if Harry et.al. have actual bones in their backs. It would be simple - take a page from the McConnell/Boehner school of diplomacy. Simply put it as follows: We all know Senators have a love of power. Well they will get a chance to exercise their power and approve the nomination of Judges from their home states or they will lose their power to have blue slips at all. In other words we are done with this foolishness.
    But I don't think Harry or Patrick have the stones.

  •  What this reall sounds like... (0+ / 0-)

    I think he is trying to send the Republicans a hint that since the filibuster is gone, if Republicans fall back on the Blue Slips for their obstructionism, they'll be gone too.

    Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your shackles. It is by the picket line and direct action that true freedom will be won, not by electing people who promise to screw us less than the other guy.

    by rhonan on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 03:01:19 PM PST

  •  The c.1917 origins of the Blue Slip (0+ / 0-)

    might be instructive, coming as it did shortly after the 17th Amendment and the direct election of Senators. No doubt it was seen as a democratic reform, giving popularly elected representative of the people a veto of sorts over the placement of judges over them by "outsiders."

    An example of one era's "reform" being another time's abomination?

    War beats down, and sows with salt, the hearts and minds of soldiers." Brecht

    by DaNang65 on Thu Nov 28, 2013 at 06:48:29 AM PST

  •  This tradition needs to fade away. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62

    With right-wingers like Inhofe and Coburn, no wonder Oklahoma has so many extremist judges.

  •  Time to put an end to this stupid "tradition" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tle, Alice Olson, eps62

    Orrin Hatch ignored it, so he can be cited as setting the precedent.

    Libertarianism is just Fascism with a facelift. Scratch the surface of Libertarianism and you will find the notion that corporations should rule supreme, just as it was with Fascism..

    by Walt starr on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:30:59 AM PST

  •  if Obama unwilling to fight, why should we? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stewarjt, divineorder

    If President Obama is unwilling to fight for his Constitutional prerogative to fill open federal judicial openings, why should we spend too much energy on it?

    If he insists on being that passive, why should we engage in this fight?

    At some point, the impediment becomes not only the GOP Senators but also our passive President.

  •  Lets work on sending them Pink slips (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62

    Its Harry Reid's fight more than Obama's. I don't see much of a role for the President in this one, but either way, Blue slips are going to be history and maybe some Republican Senators will go with it.

    Patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you king.... Dylan

    by bywaterbob on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:39:29 AM PST

    •  The President has to send names to the committee (0+ / 0-)

      before anyone in the Senate can fight for them. So far, he hasn't been doing that if a home state Senator objects. They don't even have to refuse to sign the blue slip. He calls them, they tell him not to bother, and he doesn't bother.

      The good we secure for ourselves is precarious and uncertain, is floating in mid-air, until it is secured for all of us and incorporated into our common life. Jane Addams

      by Alice Olson on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 11:03:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Don't whimp out now! Get them in. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alice Olson

    There is no time for such nonsense.

    An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

    by don mikulecky on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:45:41 AM PST

  •  Jin Crow Era Tradition? nt (0+ / 0-)

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:49:56 AM PST

  •  Rather than purse my lips in disgust, (0+ / 0-)

    I sent an email to Leahy, urging him to discard the "blue slip" procedure entirely.  I'll send one to my one Democratic senator, too, even though he's not on the committee.  I don't expect a positive reaction, but, hey, gotta start somewhere.

    I think we need to press forward with this, and flood Obama with letters as well.  The filibuster reform won't make that much of a difference in the judiciary if the "gentlemanly agreement" theme remains to hobble Democrats.

    I am become Man, the destroyer of worlds

    by tle on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 11:18:50 AM PST

  •  ??? "President Obama and his administration tell (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Simplify

    Talking Points Memo that a significant obstacle still exists, and they won't push the issue"
    ===========

    And what are the reasons they "won't push the issue"? Seems a remarkably stupid thing to decide on, much less admitt to doing.

  •  NO, no, no, no, no (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG

    Krauthammer and the WaPo front page headline writers have described this as "an outbreak of lawlessness".

    "America now has a Senate with no rules and a president without boundaries."

    You see, the Republicans now have nothing, NOTHING I tell you! One-party rule!

    And this guy is passed off as a "conservative intellectual", whatever that is.

  •  Well, the President can't tell the Senate (0+ / 0-)

    how to run its own ship. Separation of powers and all that. The leadership no doubt knows that Obama isn't happy about this state of affairs. It's important to note that nominating someone entails a HUGE burden on nominees. There is a strenuous vetting process before hand (background checks, ABA screening, local committee solicitation of applicants... I'm unclear on the order of events, but it's not uniform), and once someone is nominated, their life is basically put on hold, especially if they are attorneys in private practice (it's hard to take on new clients/cases when you may be becoming a federal judge before new assignments are completed). Your family life is also affected, as the new position may entail relocating (selling your house, buying a new house, impact on spouse's career, kids, etc). And to top it all off, especially if you're in private practice, it's likely you will get a pay cut. Patricia Millet is reportedly making millions of dollars as a private attorney; her salary will drop to under 200K per year when she joins the DC circuit. Thus, a nomination is not taken lightly, and I don't blame the Obama administration for treading carefully in the past when the nominee might never see a full vote on the Senate floor.

    It's always darkest before it gets less dark.

    by Karma Electra on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 11:45:28 AM PST

  •  Here's a summary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG

    MSNBC

    There are still 93 vacancies on the federal bench, and only 51 nominees. Thirty-seven of the remaining 42 vacancies without nominees are in states with at least one Republican Senator, according to AFJ, and Leahy won’t put a nomination forward without both blue slips. Leahy says he will keep the current blue slip practice in place, but that he won’t hesitate to change it if it’s abused.

    “I assume no one will abuse the blue slip process like some have abused the use of the filibuster to block judicial nominees on the floor of the Senate,” Leahy said in a statement to msnbc. “As long as the blue slip process is not being abused by home state senators, then I will see no reason to change that tradition.”

    We need to lean on Leahy & PBO to push this along.

    Warren is neither a Clintonesque triangulator nor an Obamaesque conciliator. She is a throwback to a more combative progressive tradition, and her candidacy is a test of whether that approach can still appeal to voters.-J. Toobin "New Yorker"

    by chuck utzman on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 12:10:49 PM PST

  •  Seriously... (0+ / 0-)

    ...what are Obama and Leahy thinking?!?  Do they ACTUALLY think that rethugs are going to nominate judicial candidates in their states???  All this work to get the filibuster ended, and now we're stopped by another invisible wall of bullshit set up by a president who once again is unwilling to PUSH THOSE F'ING RETHUGS TO THE WALL.  Damn, this crap makes me furious.

    Sometimes I don't know who is the greater threat to our democracy, rethugs or compliant, timid Democrats.

    Yep, Sen. Leahy, I'm absolutely CERTAIN that rethugs won't abuse the blue slip by simply SITTING ON THEIR ASS and not nominating anyone.  Nope, they wouldn't do that...

    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power -- Benito Mussolini

    by drcraigphd on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 01:18:34 PM PST

    •  OK, guess I missed... (0+ / 0-)

      ...that the blue slip is an approval of a nomination.  Nonetheless, my argument still stands -- rethugs will simply not approve the nominations.  And, apparently, if both senators aren't Democrats, we're stuck.

      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power -- Benito Mussolini

      by drcraigphd on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 01:25:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama didn't invent these rules (0+ / 0-)

    The process of judicial selection is complicated. At the district level, the names are proposed by Senators of the President's party, or by the highest ranking officials of the president's party if the Senators are both Republicans (i.e., the US representative(s) from the President's party in that state). In some states, there is a tradition of nominees being alternated between senators if they are from opposing parties. E.g., in Illinois, the Senator from the President's party nominates two or three judges for every one nominated by the Senator from the opposing party. Regardless, both senators have to sign off on the nominee, as do the two nominees from the opposing party when the nominees are proposed by the congressional delegation.

    It's real complicated, but these things long pre-date the arrival of Obama to the scene and there is not much he can do about them. Only with respect to circuit court nominees does the president take the clear lead on nominating judges without necessarily requiring input from senators, though it is in the nature of things that the president will nonetheless consult with members of the state associated with the judgeship (e.g., in the ninth circuit, about 70 percent of the seats are assigned to California, so DiFi and Boxer are consulted on those nominees, and may even propose them).

    It's always darkest before it gets less dark.

    by Karma Electra on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 01:37:39 PM PST

    •  EDIT (0+ / 0-)

      Meant to say: Regardless, both senators have to sign off on the nominee, as do the two senators from the opposing party when the nominees are proposed by the congressional delegation.

      It's always darkest before it gets less dark.

      by Karma Electra on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 01:45:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  if theres one thing (0+ / 0-)

    obama has taught us its that he won't fight for anything as hard as he did to get elected, good for him bad for america.

  •  blue slip (0+ / 0-)

    Because of the blue slip obama has had to nominate some conservative judges.  One judge, Robert Bacharach, was approved by the 2 Oklahoma senators for a seat on the 10th circuit. And he just joined with republican judges to kill the contraception mandate in the affordable care act.  All other democratic appointees dissented and Bacharach was the deciding vote.  Obama is filling many of these vacancies with conservatives just to satisfy republican senators.

  •  Let's make the Senate the House! (0+ / 0-)

    Because the House is so awesome, amirite?

    The first rule of government should be "Do no harm." The urge to act can frustrate the desire to help.

    by Common Cents on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 03:33:02 PM PST

  •  Why would he assume it wouldn't be abused? (0+ / 0-)

    With the track record of Republicans these days, of course it will be abused. No doubt about it.



    Women create the entire labor force.
    ---------------------------------------------
    Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

    by splashy on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 03:40:43 PM PST

  •  Well you just KNOW that they will use this option (0+ / 0-)

    just to spite the President and the Democrats......it is sickening how deranged they are about Barak Obama

  •  Pink slip (0+ / 0-)

    Senator Reid, it's time to send a pink slip to the blue slip!

    Warren/Grayson 2016! Yes We Can!

    by BenFranklin99 on Mon Dec 02, 2013 at 09:50:34 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site