Editorial: Judicial blockade must stop

As 1998 ended last year it appeared that Senate Republican efforts to delay voting on President Clinton's nominees for federal judgeships finally had ended. Several nominees were approved by the GOP-controlled Senate, including Johnnie Rawlinson, who was confirmed as a U.S. District Court judge in Nevada.

But that optimism might have been premature. The Los Angeles Times reported Monday that a rift between a key Republican senator and the White House has stalled hearings for five months on Clinton's nominations for 36 federal judgeships. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the Judiciary Committee chairman, wants the president to nominate the Utah governor's conservative chief of staff to be a federal judge. Clinton has balked and a five-month standoff has ensued.

When voters elect a president, they also give the chief executive the power to nominate people for federal judgeships. The Senate in turn must give its consent before these nominees receive a lifetime appointment.

Politics has played a role in nominating federal judges throughout American history, but in the past few years the process has gotten so nasty that the partisan spats have hampered the operation of the courts themselves. Even Chief Justice William Rehnquist was compelled in his annual report in January 1998 to complain about the Senate's failure to hold prompt hearings on these nominations. Rehnquist said these vacancies contributed to a backlog of cases and needless delays in civil cases.

Senators sometimes will hold up the appointment of a federal official if they have a dispute with the administration. But it is wrong for one senator to play games with the timely consideration of 36 federal judicial nominees put forward by the president. The consequence of this brand of politics only serves to hurt the delivery of justice.

archive