(This update courtesy of the Media Research Center.)
In both cases, Rehnquist's comments came in his annual year-
end report, on the state of the judiciary, issued every December
31.
Four years ago, when 82 federal judgeships stood unfilled,
Rehnquist asserted: “The Senate is surely under no obligation to
confirm any particular nominee, but after the necessary time for
inquiry, it should vote him up or vote him down.” On December 31,
2001, with 94 judgeships vacant, Rehnquist employed similar
language as he implored: “On behalf of the judiciary, I ask
Congress to raise the salaries of federal judges, and I ask the
Senate to schedule up or down votes on judicial nominees within a
reasonable time after receiving the nomination…. The Senate is
not, of course, obliged to confirm any particular nominee….but I
urge prompt attention to the challenge of bringing the federal
judicial branch closer to full staffing.”
Rehnquist has remained consistent in chiding the Senate, no
matter which party is in control, but not The New York Times.
Under the front page headline, “Senate Imperils Judicial
System, Rehnquist Says,” reporter John H. Cushman Jr. wrote the
January 1, 1998 story. An excerpt:
In an unusual rebuke, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist today
criticized the Senate for failing to move more quickly on
judicial appointments, saying that the “vacancies cannot remain at
such high levels indefinitely without eroding the quality of
justice.”
The Chief Justice made the statement in his annual year-end report
of the state of the judiciary — a 19-page document in which he
also praised Congress for responding to other judicial concerns,
like increasing judges' salaries and providing more money for
operations of the courts. But he said that the major problem
facing the judiciary was “too few judges and too much work” and
that continuing inaction on nominees was imperiling the court
system.
Chief Justice Rehnquist said delays by President Clinton in
sending nominations to the Senate had contributed to the
problem, but his main criticism fell on the Senate itself, which
is responsible for approving or rejecting nominees to the
Federal judiciary.
“The Senate is surely under no obligation to confirm any
particular nominee, but after the necessary time for inquiry, it
should vote him up or vote him down,” the Chief Justice said.
Chief Justice Rehnquist and other judges have complained before
about the problem of vacancies, but the Chief Justice's
remarks today were especially pointed….
Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the
Judiciary Committee, said he hoped the Chief Justice's report
would “help shame the Senate into clearing the backlog.” Mr. Leahy
said more than 40 judicial nominees were kept on hold in 1997,
some of them in limbo since 1995….
END of Excerpt
But with Leahy now the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, The New York Times avoided criticism of him and focused
its story on another aspect of Rehnquist's latest annual report.
An excerpt from the January 1, 2002 story by Linda Greenhouse,
headlined “Rehnquist Says Courts Risk Losing Private-Sector
Nominees.” The first four paragraphs followed by the tenth and
eleventh ones:
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist warned today that a combination
of relatively low salaries and a tortuous confirmation process was
making the federal judiciary increasingly unappealing as a career
move for lawyers in private practice.
The result, he said in his annual year-end report, is that federal
judges are increasingly being recruited from among lawyers already
in public service, working as public prosecutors or defenders,
federal magistrate or bankruptcy judges, or serving on state
courts.
“For them the pay is a modest improvement and the confirmation
process at least does not damage their current income,” the chief
justice said.
He said the risk was that the judiciary would lose the perspective
of lawyers who had spent their careers in the private sector, and
would come to resemble European systems in which young lawyers
choose to become judges in what is in effect a civil service
system….
On the pace of confirmation for judicial nominees, Chief Justice
Rehnquist noted that in past years, he had criticized a
Republican-controlled Senate for delays in considering President
Bill Clinton's nominees. “Now the political situation is exactly
the reverse, but the same situation obtains,” he said, noting that
the Senate confirmed 28 judges during 2001 and adjourned without
acting on 37 nominations.
“The Senate is not, of course, obliged to confirm any particular
nominee,” he said. “But it ought to act on each nominee and to do
so within a reasonable time.”…
END of Excerpt
For the entire article, go to: www.nytimes.com
