from The Great Debate:

Filling judicial vacancies to protect the progressive legacy

By Herman Schwartz
January 13, 2014

What could never happen, finally did.

For more than 30 years the Democratic Senate caucus feebly stood by as Republicans seized control of the federal courts. Now, however, faced with a GOP filibuster of nominees for three vacancies on the appeals court that could determine the fate of most of President Barack Obama’s initiatives, the Democrats have at last responded.

from The Great Debate:

The Senate after filibuster reform

By Thomas E. Mann
November 25, 2013

The Washington Post editorial page led the charge in denouncing the change in Senate filibuster rules engineered by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and 51 of his Democratic colleagues last Thursday. Many other media voices quickly followed suit.

from Reihan Salam:

What the filibuster’s demise means for the Supreme Court

By Reihan Salam
November 22, 2013

Now that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has ended the filibuster for district and appeals court nominees and executive branch appointments, it’s only a matter of time before the filibuster goes away for Supreme Court nominations and legislation as well. Reid’s decision has been a long time coming: One of his predecessors, Republican Bill Frist, came very close to ending the filibuster in 2005.

from The Great Debate:

Time for Senate compromise on judicial nominees

By Alicia Bannon
July 26, 2013

All eyes were on the Senate last week as Democrats and Republicans reached an agreement to move forward on confirming certain stalled executive branch nominees. This new spirit of compromise was heralded, but before we begin celebrating, it is worth noting that judges were not part of the deal.

from The Great Debate:

Fighting the filibuster

By Ari Melber
December 3, 2012

President Barack Obama recently said Congress should “seize the moment” and summon a majority to push immigration reform. There is only one problem – Congress already did that.

from Stories I’d like to see:

Homeland loses focus, ditching the filibuster, unions that own big business

By Steven Brill
May 8, 2012

1. Protecting the Homeland….in New Zealand

Is Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano completely on the sidelines? And has she not gotten the memo about limiting government travel? How else to explain that on May 2 she began a trip to New Zealand and Australia? May 2 was the anniversary of Osama bin Laden’s death, when we were supposedly on high alert for possible al Qaeda attacks; and it was also when the prostitution scandal involving the Secret Service – which is part of Napolitano’s department – was raging. A Department of Homeland Security press release described the trip this way:

from The Great Debate:

After clash, Senate filibuster ends in whimper

April 29, 2010

Just a few minutes after the Senate failed for a third time in as many days to reach the 60-votes needed to approve a cloture motion on the financial reform bill (failing 56-42), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rose to his feet and asked the chamber's presiding officer:

from Tales from the Trail:

Specter believes Senate would reject filibuster against Obama’s pick for high-court ‘ideological battleground’

April 13, 2010

The person who arguably knows as much as anyone in the U.S. Senate about counting votes and judicial confirmation battles has some advice for President Barack Obama: