NYT: A Spur in the Filibuster Fight: A Court\u2019s Workload and Politics by Adam Liptak:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON \u2014 The overhaul of the Senate\u2019s filibuster rules was prompted, surprisingly, by an argument about judicial productivity.<\/p>\n
Republicans said President Obama\u2019s nominees to three open seats on a federal appeals court in Washington were not needed because the court does not have enough to do.<\/p>\n
But trying to quantify the workload of the court, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, \u201cis a statistical food fight,\u201d said Russell Wheeler, an expert on the federal courts at the Brookings Institution. The real issue, he said, was \u201cthe ideological balance of the court.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
One can’t help but have a warm place in the heart for a court where United States v. Maynard came from that led to United States v. Jones, written by a Republican appointee<\/a>, no less.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading