Orrin Hatch: “we have before us one of the most activist judicial nominees we have seen in years. Rather than choose a more consensus…”

“we have before us one of the most activist judicial nominees we have seen in years. Rather than choose a more consensus nominee, President Obama has chosen to again provoke a political confrontation. This is unnecessary, divisive, and not in the best interests of either the judicial selection process or the judiciary. The Constitution gives the power to appoint judges to the President, not to the Senate. I believe, therefore, that the Senate owes the President some deference with respect to nominees who are qualified by both legal experience and, more importantly, judicial philosophy. A nominee whose record shows that she has an activist judicial philosophy is simply not qualified to sit on the Federal bench, and the Senate owes the President no deference under those circumstances. That is the kind of nominee we have before us today. Nothing has changed since a cloture motion failed on this nominee in December 2011. Well, that might not be quite true. One thing that has changed is that the need to fill another vacancy on the D.C. Circuit is even less today than it was then. Year after year, case filings decrease for the D.C. Circuit while they increase for the rest of the judiciary. Year after year, the D.C. Circuit ranks last among the 12 geographical circuits in the number of appeals filed per three-judge panel. The court has even cancelled argument days because of an insufficient docket.…”