# Are ANY of George W. Bush's Judicial Nominees Moderate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 1, 2004, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514 "2004-09-01T01:59:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Jim\_B](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jim_b/32/4338_2.png) [@Jim\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_B)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/1 "2004-09-01T01:59:05Z")
I have been wondering this for some time now. And I know there is alot of anecdotal evidence surrounding this question. But are **any** of George W. Bush’s judicial nominees moderate? I know Democrats block most?/all? of his nominees for being to extremist. But surely some of his nominees must be moderate. And if so, I would appreciate it if someone could provide a percentage 🙂 . P.S. BTW, by moderate I mean that they might support _Roe v. Wade_ (like Assoc. Jus. Sandra Day O’Connor). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/2 "2004-09-01T02:36:22Z")
There is no objective definition of “moderate.” This thread really belongs in GD. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/3 "2004-09-01T03:09:01Z")
**Jim B.** wrote," I know Democrats block most?/all? of his nominees for being to extremist." Actually, most of Mr. Bush’s nominees have gone right through. When compared with the percentage of blocked nominees during the Clinton years, the Democrats have been generous to Bush. The Republicans make a fuss when it does happen, and that’s enough to make some folks think that no nominees are getting in. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/4 "2004-09-01T03:25:54Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > There is no objective definition of “moderate.” This thread really belongs in GD. He gave a definition of “moderate”. For the purposes of the question, > [@](#): > > BTW, by moderate I mean that they might support Roe v. Wade ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/5 "2004-09-01T03:41:09Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > There is no objective definition of “moderate.” This thread really belongs in GD. It would seem to me that one could come up with a fairly decent definition of “moderate” by cobbling together a few criteria. Off the top of my head: 1. A rating of “qualified” or higher, preferably “highly qualified,” from the ABA 2. A higher-than-10% score from both a liberal advocacy group and a conservative advocacy group that use the 0-to-100 scale for grading candidates. (10% is arbitrary – you may want to make it 20% or 25% minimum.) 3. An endorsement by a good moderate organization that is not polemic – if you can find one that qualifies and that ranks candidates for judgeships. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/6 "2004-09-01T04:51:28Z")
This one is gonna wind up a debate, no matter how well it started. Moved from GQ to GD. **samclem** GQ moderator ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/7 "2004-09-01T05:03:05Z")
In an attempt to mend fences with Senate Democrats, Bush renominated two Clinton appointments whose confirmations couldn’t be heard before the Presidential election. These two, Judges Roger Gregory and Barrington Parker, can be considered moderate to liberal. This goodwill gesture got Bush nowhere, so don’t look for him to do something stupid like this again. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/8 "2004-09-01T06:13:31Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > This goodwill gesture got Bush nowhere, so don’t look for him to do something stupid like this again. The Democrats, hopefully, have learned a similar lesson from letting 98% of Bush’s extremist nominees get confirmed without a fuss. Give George an inch and he’ll screw you for a mile. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/9 "2004-09-01T06:24:28Z")
Actually a lot of Bush’s appointments weren’t extremists by any degree. You have to remember no one, and I mean almost no one, referred to Bush or Gore as anything other than “boring moderates” prior to 9/11 or so. Does Bush predominantly appoint people that lean Republican? Yes. That is the political spoils system, and love it or hate it, it’s been the norm for 150+ years. The argument can be made “shouldn’t we worry about qualified candidates over political spoils” and yes, you should be. But there are a shitload of legal professionals that are all more than qualified enough to be appointed to say Federal Judgeships, so it’s not like Bush is really taking vastly underqualified people and appointing them. Furthermore, despite the political aspects of a judge’s life you would be surprised just how many judges truly are arbitrary in the courtroom. You’d be surprised to find how seriously many of them take their jobs. I would actually say that paradoxically the USSC Judges are the _least_ arbitrary of all the judges in the Federal judiciary. Even still, look to Warren Burger. Highly touted Conservative, did a lot of things that had Nixon fuming nonetheless. When you’re appointed for life you pretty much get to do what you feel is right and to hell with everyone else. ---
**Author:** ![Donovan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ea666f/32.png) [@Donovan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donovan)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/10 "2004-09-01T07:33:23Z")
> [@AskNott](#): > > **Jim B.** wrote," I know Democrats block most?/all? of his nominees for being to extremist." > > Actually, most of Mr. Bush’s nominees have gone right through. When compared with the percentage of blocked nominees during the Clinton years, the Democrats have been generous to Bush. The Republicans make a fuss when it does happen, and that’s enough to make some folks think that no nominees are getting in. I’d like to see some cites to back that up. I was talking to someone a few weeks ago who said just the opposite (Dems hold up all of Bush’s nominees, Repubs let most of Clinton’s through), and I did a quick search, finding nothing to contradict him… (I’m not calling you on this, I really would like to see those cites, cause this is the only point in our argument he nailed me on…) ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2004, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/11 "2004-09-01T18:31:24Z")
> [@Donovan](#): > > I’d like to see some cites to back that up. I was talking to someone a few weeks ago who said just the opposite (Dems hold up all of Bush’s nominees, Repubs let most of Clinton’s through), and I did a quick search, finding nothing to contradict him… (I’m not calling you on this, I really would like to see those cites, cause this is the only point in our argument he nailed me on…) I find it to be a sorry state of affairs (not necessarily blaming you) that people believe such lies. For heaven’s sake, the numbers have even appeared on the op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal (care of the one token moderate to liberal columnist who appears there every week…I forget his name). Since I can’t find that cite online, I’ll have to give you the [one](http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-doc.cfm?doc_name=fs-108-2-197) I can find which is to U.S. Senate’s Democratic Policy Committee: > [@](#): > > Ninety-Seven Percent Federal Judgeships Now Filled; Lowest Number Of Vacancies Since Reagan > > Today, 851 men and women serve as judges in our Article III federal courts, which is more than at any time in our history. With only 28 vacant seats, 97 percent of the authorized judgeships are filled and we are at the lowest number of vacancies since the Reagan Administration.1 There are now fewer vacancies on both the Circuit and District Courts than at any time in President Clinton’s two terms. > > Eighty-Eight Percent Of Bush’s Nominees Confirmed Thus Far; Higher Than The 81 Percent Confirmed During Clinton’s First Four Years > > The high number of judicial confirmations reflects the significant work of the Senate in considering President Bush’s judicial nominees. President Bush’s judicial nominees have been confirmed at a rate better than or equal to his recent predecessors in their first or only terms in office. > Democrats have used the filibuster sparingly, only to block a handful of judicial nominees with records outside the mainstream. Democrats have blocked only seven Bush judicial nominees. Republicans blocked confirmation votes on more than 60 of President Clinton’s judicial nominees (including nearly two dozen Circuit Court nominees). > > … > > Democrats have used the filibuster sparingly, only to block a handful of judicial nominees with records outside the mainstream. Democrats have blocked only seven Bush judicial nominees. Republicans blocked confirmation votes on more than 60 of President Clinton’s judicial nominees (including nearly two dozen Circuit Court nominees). Note that the Republicans have made a big deal about the Democrats using the filibuster. However, this is the only method available to them when they are not in control of the Senate as the Republicans were for much of Clinton’s time in office. And, in fact, the filibuster is a much fairer way to block nominees in the sense that 40 Senators have to go on record as being opposed to the nomination. During Clinton’s time, most of the blocked nominees never even got a vote. In fact, in many cases you had just one or a few extremist senators like Jesse Helms blocking them. So, while in that case a few extremist Senators could hold up one moderate nominee, in the case of Bush’s appointments you only get a nominee blocked if he is so extremist that at least 40 Senators think so and are willing to go on record in opposition. ---
**Author:** ![Governor\_Quinn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d26b3c/32.png) [@Governor\_Quinn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Governor_Quinn)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/12 "2004-09-02T00:33:32Z")
Off the top of my head, I can think of one: former Congressman Bill Martini of New Jersey. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2004, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/13 "2004-09-02T03:16:42Z")
The official numbers: > [@](#): > > Since July, 2001, despite the fact that the Senate majority has shifted twice, a total of 171 judicial nominations have already been confirmed, including 29 circuit court appointments. One hundred judges were confirmed in the 17 months of the Democratic Senate majority. The Senate has only blocked 3.4 percent of President Bush’s judicial nominees. This is compared to the Senate, under Republican control, blocking 20 percent of President Clinton’s judicial nominees. (Source: Sen. Leahy, (D-VT)) So percentage-wise, Clinton had about six times as many nominees blocked as Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Donovan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ea666f/32.png) [@Donovan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donovan)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/14 "2004-09-08T23:05:31Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > I find it to be a sorry state of affairs (not necessarily blaming you) that people believe such lies. Hey, I didn’t believe it, just couldn’t contradict him with facts this time (he’s always spouting out right wing shit and I have to pull down a few websites to shut him up). So I’m not gullible, just google impaired :D. Maybe I’ll just tell him to provide a cite or shut up in the future… Thanks for the link. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-any-of-george-w-bushs-judicial-nominees-moderate/262514/15 "2004-09-08T23:41:47Z")
No, problem. Glad to help out.