United States Senate Republicans and one conservative Democrat used a filibuster to block the consideration of Goodwin Liu, an associate dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last Thursday.
In a 52-43 tally, Democrats were eight votes shy in ending the filibuster and securing a straight up-or-down vote for Liu’s nomination. Per constitutional rule, 60 out of 100 votes are needed to end a filibuster.
The filibuster was created mainly to protect minority party interests against majority party dominance when voting in the Senate. Because excessive use of the filibuster would enable a minority of senators to paralyze any progress, it is traditionally used sparingly.
A filibuster to block a Court of Appeals nominee was first used in 1980 when Republicans tried but failed to block former President Jimmy Carter’s nomination of Stephen Breyer to the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
Liu’s nomination for the position — his third from President Barack Obama — has been a rocky and contentious process. Republicans have questioned Liu’s qualifications for the position, stating that he lacks experience, and reiterated concerns about him promoting a liberal interpretation of the Constitution.
Liu has been a professor at the UC Berkeley School of Law since 2003 and specializes in constitutional law.
In last year’s congressional session, Liu testified before the senate’s Judiciary Committee, after which Republican senators confronted him with supplemental questions via email. Republicans voted along party lines in favor of bringing it to the full Senate, but never voted to confirm the nomination.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said in a statement that the filibuster of Liu’s nomination would put the legal system at a disadvantage.
“I believe the ramifications of this Republican filibuster will be deeply felt in California and across the country,” she said in the statement. “When we deny a judicial nominee of Professor Liu’s caliber — a man of intelligence, integrity and dignity — we weaken our nation’s legal system.”
Katie Nelson is an assistant news editor.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
We need you at Cal Liu…welcome home.
Californians face foreclosure, unemployment, depressed
wages and higher taxes: it’s time the Governor, UC Board of Regents, President
Yudof showed leadership by curbing costs, particularly wages, benefits. As a
Californian, I don’t care what others earn at private, public universities. If wages
better elsewhere, chancellors, vice chancellors, tenured, non tenured faculty, UCOP
should apply for the positions. If wages commit employees to UC, leave for
better paying position. The sky above UC will not fall.
California suffers from the
greatest deficit modern times. UC wages, benefits must reflect California’s ability to
pay, not what others paid elsewhere. Campus chancellors, vice chancellors,
tenured & non-tenured faculty, UCOP are replaceable by the more talented.
UC eases pressure for tax extensions:
No furloughs
18 percent reduction in UCOP salaries & $50 million cut.
18 percent prune of campus chancellors’, vice chancellors’ salaries.
15 percent trim of tenured faculty salaries, increased teaching load
10 percent decrease in non-tenured faculty salaries, as well as increase research,
teaching load
100%
elimination of all Academic Senate, Academic Council costs, wages.
Rose
bushes bloom after pruning.
The Governor, UC Board of Regents, whining President can bridge
the trust gap to public by offering reassurances that salaries reflect depressed
wages in California.
The sky above UC will not fall.
Californians are reasonable people. Levy no new taxes until
an approved balanced budget: let the Governor/Legislature lead; make the
tough-minded (not cold hearted) decisions of elected leadership. Afterwards
come to public for continuing, specified
taxes.
Thanking
you in advance for advocating for all Californians, University of California
“Because excessive use of the filibuster would enable a minority of
senators to paralyze any progress, it is traditionally used sparingly.”
Except when George Bush was the president, when it was used gratuitously. Hilarious how much liberals’ opinion of filibustering changed once a Dem was elected to the presidency.
Hypocrites.