Martha Montelongo Myers
March 17, 2003
 

The nomination of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has stirred up a hornets nest not seen since Clarence Thomas was nominated to the US Supreme Court.

There are some interesting parallels in the two nominations.

Both nominees are minorities, Thomas is black and Estrada is Hispanic. Both were nominated by a Republican President and opposed by Democrats. Both nominees are highly qualified but opposed on an ideological basis. 

The Democrats claim to be the party that protects and defends minorities. So why are the Democrats obsessed with blocking highly qualified minorities to positions of political importance? I suggest that the Democrats in the US Senate are suffering from Diversity Hypocrisy.

Liberal pundits have noted that Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle has managed to keep all but four of his Democrats in line but he will need to enforce discipline to confront President Bush on this issue. Note: the dilemma that the Democrats have is how to confront the President – not how to confirm a judicial appointment to highly qualified minority nominees.

Why are the Democrats afraid to have Republican minority nominees confirmed? The simple answer is that the Democrats want to keep all minorities on the liberal plantation. If the word gets out that minority's can exist without womb to tomb liberalism, the Democrat Party is doomed.

Both Justice Thomas and nominee Estrada started from meager backgrounds, worked hard, excelled, and have risen to the top of their field. Yet the Democrats oppose both. Why?

Thomas and Estrada believe in upholding the US Constitution which provided them and other minorities the opportunities to succeed. The Democrats believe in the ‘living constitution’ which allows emotion and the ‘ideology of the day’ to control public policy.

This permits the Democrats to dole out ‘goodies’ to those minorities that remain on the Liberal Plantation. Those that believe in the Constitution and personal responsibility resist the plantation mentality and the controls that are associated with it.

Why are the Democrats conducting this judicial inquisition? The Democrats are obsessed with knowing how a judge will vote prior to the case reaching the court. Imagine the lunacy of this demand. Judges are supposed to be an impartial ruler of the facts of a particular case.

But the Democrats want to know how a judge will rule on cases not yet submitted to the court. Forget the merits of a potential case – the Democrats demand to know if the nominee to will embrace their socialist agenda and continue the myth of a ‘living constitution.’

Early in President Bushes term, he had considered abandoning the practice of having the American Bar Association (ABA) evaluate judicial nominees. The Democrats objected and demanded that President Bush continue to use the ABA to evaluate judicial nominees.

The President acquiesced and submitted Estrada to the ABA for review. The ABA gave Miguel Estrada their highest rating; so much for the questions about his judicial qualifications.

But who is Miguel Estrada and why did the ABA think he was highly qualified for the judicial appointment? When Miguel Estrada came to America from Honduras at age 17 he spoke little English. But he didn’t let a language barrier get in his way. He graduated from Columbia University, then Harvard Law School, where he became the editor of the prestigious Harvard Law Review. He then served as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, and then was named an assistant U.S. attorney. President Clinton recognized his abilities and appointed him as an assistant solicitor general where he argued 15 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Miguel Estrada was nominated two years ago but the Senate Democrats claim that they don’t know enough about him. If they were really interested they could read the ABA evaluation.

The Democrats also questioned him in the Senate Judicial Committee hearings before he was approved by the committee. Still the Democrats claimed they wanted more information. The White House responded to their request and offered to have Estrada answer all written questions within a week. No requests for information were received.

It soon became evident that the Democrats were not going to allow this highly qualified minority to be appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Since the Democrats knew that a majority would support the nomination (all the Republicans and at least four Democrats), the only way to block Estrada was to conduct a filibuster. Since to break a Senate filibuster requires a super majority of 60 votes, the Democrats could now block the nomination.

The question is how long will the Democrat elites use "Diversity Hypocrisy" to block the appointment of a highly qualified minority to the federal judiciary? Or better yet, how long will minorities allow the Democrats to block our path to success?

Her focus includes Hispanic outreach, education reform, small business, health care and women in business. She is committed to advancing the strength and vitality of the emerging Latino middle class and business sector, as the cornerstone of a free and vibrant society.

To contact the author, go to  MarthaMontelongo.com.

Martha Montelongo Myers is the political commentator and host for Straight Talk with Martha, on News Talk AM 1460 KION radio, Sat 6 to 10 PM.

Her focus includes Hispanic outreach, education reform, small business, health care and women in business. She is committed to advancing the strength and vitality of the emerging Latino middle class and business sector, as the cornerstone of a free and vibrant society.

To contact the author, go to  MarthaMontelongo.com.

Back to Today's News

Calnews.com News/Politics/and More