Page 1 of 1

#1 Republicans attempt to split 9th Circuit court

Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:37 pm
by Ace Pace
GOP move to advance 9th Circuit split draws heat from Democrats

WASHINGTON - House Republicans on Thursday included a break-up of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a budget bill that would be immune from Senate filibuster, drawing complaints from Democrats.

"It does not have the support to pass both houses of Congress, so House Republicans are seeking to stifle debate and the democratic process by inserting a controversial measure into the expedited budget process," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco.

The House Budget Committee included the measure in a $54 billion deficit-reduction bill that is expected to get a House floor vote next week.

The measure would create a 9th Circuit covering California, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands, and a new 12th Circuit covering Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Arizona.

Supporters say the 9th Circuit, which covers nine states with about 54 million people, is too large to operate effectively. But opponents allege politics by Republicans angry at some of the court's rulings, like the 2002 opinion that declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional when recited in public schools.

Republicans have been trying for years to break up the 9th Circuit. They've tried unsuccessfully in the past to get the measure through Congress attached to budget bills full of other provisions lawmakers want to support.

The full Senate passed its own version of the deficit reduction bill on Thursday without the 9th Circuit split. If the breakup makes it through the House, congressional negotiators would have to work out whether to include it in the final bill the House and Senate would vote on.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said Thursday that if the circuit split measure comes to the Senate floor she'll block it with a technical objection against allowing non-budgetary provisions in budget bills.
Link

It makes sense to break up and divide it...but passing it under another bill? And letting bush appoint every single judge?

#2

Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:41 pm
by Josh
Running in by amendment is bog-standard parliamentary tactics and one of the most common answers for filibusters. And any new judges would be appointed by Junior regardless.

Amendment-larding os one of the more obnoxious features of our system, but there's nothing to be done for except to fight it where it happens.