Yeah

[sombrefan]

Just what I wanted CSI: frigging New York. Christ on a bike, why not spin it out to its natural conclusion and have CSI: Podunk.


And in a rare spirit of non-partisanship I invite Republicans, Democrats and those of the third way to explain whats the point of having a system where the Senate approves judges if the President can appoint them anyway when Senate is in recess. I really don't understand whats the point of the system then. I must be missing something here. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Bush sidesteps Senate over judge

Comments

Us Crazy Americans

[ffejl.livejournal.com]

Well, first, this is really a "temporary" appointment. The next Congress (which meets in January 2005) still has to approve this guy, or he's off the bench. And, second, it's not entirely clear that this kind of recess appoint *is* constitutional. Nevertheless, it's been done many, many times in US History.

Thoughtful commentary (dating back to when Clinton made a recess appointment) at http://www.bipc.com/news.cfm?mode=article&article_id=492&practice_id=56

thank you

[simonf.livejournal.com]

much appreciated :)