ALSO VISIT

As the US celebrates its Independence Day, marking the date when Independence from the British crown was officially declared in the year 1776, the coming senatorial showdown over the next nominee to sit for life on the Supreme Court puts the constitutionally enshrined filibuster right in jeopardy.

Members of the Republican party, loyal to the president and hoping to see a firm conservative ideologue appointed to the Court, are already calling for Democrats to forego issue-specific questioning, claiming there should be no filibuster no matter the political views or qualifications of the nominee, and that any nominee should be swiftly approved. Nevertheless, not everything is working in the President's favor: many believe his friend, colleague and current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, controversial for drafting memos which appear to support the use of torture, is a leading candidate for the nomination, but conservatives in Congress have raised their objections to some of his views.

Democrats allege the President is trying to usurp the Senate's constitutional authority by pressuring his party to eliminate the proper and legally required debate in an effort to win easy approval for radical partisans who might seek to undermine the system of checks and balances that constrains the authority of the Executive over the institution of laws and the fate of the nation. Republicans charge this is alarmism, but nevertheless seek to bar the minority party from using the time-tested and well-used process of the filibuster, designed to prevent a majority from imposing harsh policies unfavorable to minority political views or to the nation's system of laws as such.

The irony currently at issue is that this new confrontation over the right of the People's representatives to keep debate open indefinitely is coming to a head on the day the nation celebrates the beginning of its liberty and the enunciation of its democratic principles, supposed to be "self-evident" and of benefit to all. [For more: Washington Post]

BACKGROUND:
CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS PRESERVED
24 May 2005

Late last night, word came that a group of moderate senators from both parties had agreed to a plan that would prevent the Republican leadership from eliminating the filibuster from debate over judicial nominations. The parliamentary institution, enshrined in the constitutional rights of the minority to participate in and curb the activities of the majority party, can be an annoyance to leaders, but has served both parties consistently throughout Senate history and is seen as a key check on unfettered centralized power in Washington. [Full Story]

CBC CALLS TO PROTECT PROCEDURE USED TO DEFEND VIEWS OF MINORITY (DESPITE PAST FILIBUSTERS USED AGAINST CIVIL LIBERTIES)
22 May 2005

The Congressional Black Caucus, in order to defend the concept of minority rights within the functioning of the US Congress, held a press conference explaining the importance of the filibuster in Senate procedure. They cited the many occasions where the Republican party and conservative southern Democrats used the filibuster to oppose civil rights legislation in the mid-twentieth century, saying that though they opposed the politics of such an implementation of the filibuster, it served to protect the right of minority viewpoints to be heard in open debate, and even to control the direction of debate. [Full Story]