Originally Posted By Dabob2 Are you talking about Estrada? He would have gone to the Court of Appeals, not SCOTUS. Also, a quick google search reveals that Democrats approved 27 lower court Hispanic justices under Bush, all conservatives. Estrada was blocked for being too out of the mainstream, and refusing to answer senators' questions, not for being conservative per se. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/05/opinion/miguel-estrada-bows-out.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09...out.html</a>
Originally Posted By wahooskipper If a congressperson can vote "no" on a nominee because they might be "too conservative" (as Obama did) then another should be able to vote "no" if one appears to be too liberal. It should not come as a shock to anyone.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Voting no is fine. Voting to filibuster so that they don't even get a vote is what is at issue here. The Democrats don't quite have enough to block a filibuster. A good number of Democrats voted no on Alito (including Obama), but they didn't filibuster so that he never even got the vote.
