The group, originally called the Judicial Confirmation Network, was among the most vocal supporters of "fair" treatment of judicial nominees during the George W. Bush administration, including up-or-down majority votes for all.
Want daily updates on important issues? Subscribe to
The GOP currently enjoys a world where their legal heroes can reach the highest pinnacles of the federal judiciary, while similarly-situated progressives languish behind filibusters or are never nominated at all. And now Republicans risk upending that world because they want even more.
Senate Republicans signaled Thursday that they would rather keep a key federal appeals court seat empty than fill it with a moderate Obama nominee, even if it means Democrats resort to the nuclear option.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the senior-most member of the Senate, has a warning for his Republican colleagues -- either they back off their efforts to maintain Republican control over a powerful federal court, or they could lose their ability to filibuster judicial nominees forever.
Control of the second most powerful court in the country hinges upon what the Senate does in the coming weeks. The court is likely to remain staunchly Republican unless Democrats rally behind the nuclear option.
The judge allegedly texted the prosecutor "to suggest questions for the prosecutor to ask during the trial; to ensure that a witness was able to refresh his memory and rehabilitate his testimony . . . and to discuss legal issues pertinent to the case."
He referenced the recent actions of San Antonio City Councilwoman Elisa Chan, a Republican candidate for Texas State Senate, who fought against a citywide employment non-discrimination law and was recorded on tape calling homosexuality “so disgusting."