James M. Talent: “I want to read an editorial from the February 18 issue of the Washington Post. It sums up the case better than or as…”

“I want to read an editorial from the February 18 issue of the Washington Post. It sums up the case better than or as well as I can: The Senate has recessed without voting on the nomination of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Because of a Democratic filibuster, it spent much of the week debating Mr. Estrada, and, at least for now, enough Democrats are holding together to prevent the full senate from acting. We all know a filibuster is underway here, an obstruction tactic. That is not from the editorial. That was my editorial comment. The arguments against Mr. Estrada's confirmation range from the unpersuasive to the offensive. He lacks judicial experience, his critics say--though only three current members of the court had been judges before their nominations. He is too young--though he is about the same age as Judge Harry T. Edwards was when he was appointed and several years older than Kenneth W. Starr was when he was nominated. Mr. Estrada stonewalled the Judiciary Committee by refusing to answer questions--though his answers were similar in nature to those of previous nominees, including many nominated by Democratic presidents. The administration refused to turn over his Justice Department memos--though no reasonable Congress ought to be seeking such material, as a letter from all living former solicitors general attests.…”