Republicans Flip Flop on Constitutionality of Filibusters - 20 Nov 2003
|
...From the floor of the Senate, Republicans have been claiming that the Democrats' filibusters of judicial nominees are unconstitutional and that the Democratic Party is trying to rewrite the U.S. Constitution by forcing a super-majority of 60 votes instead of a simple majority of 51 votes in order to confirm a Christian, pro-life judicial appointee. But now that the public interest law firm known as Judicial Watch has filed a suit challenging the constitutionality of the filibuster tactic, those same Republicans are defending filibusters in court. Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton says the GOP has a problem. He says Senate Republicans want to keep the ability to filibuster, ultimately, because they may not always be the majority party and will want to be able to use the prolonged debate technique for their own purposes. "So in some ways, there's a little politics here," Fitton says, noting, "They're complaining about the Democrat's use of the filibuster -- but are they complaining about just the filibuster, or just the fact that Democrats are using the filibuster?" The Republicans' lawyers have joined Democrats in fighting the lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch. |