Senate OKs pro-life judge, falls short on four nominees

By Tom Strode - Jun 15, 2004 - comment

The U.S. Senate confirmed a nominee to a federal judgeship in Arkansas in spite of opposition from abortion-rights and feminist organizations, but Democrats added to the number of appeals court judges they are filibustering.

In a 51-46 vote July 6, the Senate confirmed J. Leon Holmes to the Eastern District Court in Arkansas. Opponents charged Holmes was unsuitable for the federal bench because of his pro-life advocacy. Holmes had served as president of Arkansas Right to Life. Critics also portrayed him as anti-woman, citing in particular an article his wife, Susan, and he wrote in 1997 for a Roman Catholic publication. In it, they wrote “the husband is to love his wife as Christ loves the Church; and as the Church subordinates herself to Christ, in that manner the wife is to subordinate herself to her husband.”

While one of Bush’s highly contested nominees cleared confirmation, Senate Democrats continued to block confirmation votes on some of his appellate nominees.

On July 20 and 22, Democrats upheld filibusters on a nominee from Idaho and three nominees from Michigan. Supporters of the nominees achieved a majority in the Senate but failed to reach the 60-vote minimum needed to invoke cloture and halt filibusters.

The July 20 vote was 53-44 for William Myers of Idaho. Bush nominated him to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The July 22 votes were 54-44 for Richard Griffin, 53-44 for David McKeague and 52-46 for Henry Saad. All are selections for the Sixth Circuit.

The Democrats have maintained their filibusters of Janice Rogers Brown, a District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals nominee; Carolyn Kuhl, a Ninth Circuit selection; and Priscilla Owen, a Fifth Circuit nominee.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Life, Stem-Cell Research

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com