Minority Rights

Judging by the reaction, I'd call the last-minute deal on judicial nominations a victory for the Democrats. Liberal reaction seem to range from satisfied to questioning, conservative from questioning to despair, at least in my limited reading.

This makes sense. The "nuclear option," if successful, would have been a huge victory for the Republicans. It would have just about guaranteed Bush gets every judge he wants for the rest of his term, while any political fallout for the vote itself was questionable. (The rest--the long run--has to be considered a wash at worst). The compromise, unless it unfolds in unexpected ways (i.e., the Democrats treat the phrase "extraordinary circumstances" as having any meaning), pretty much gives the Democrats what they want--preservation of the (previously unused) judicial filibuster to stop Supreme Court Justices they don't like (that's where it truly matters), while the Republicans apparently back off on the principle of an up or down vote for every nominee.

The bigger point is one I made a few weeks ago. I noted the filibuster is not only NOT one of the Constitution's checks and balances, it's practically anti-Constitution, since the document demands majority vote wins in the Senate. But, I noted, that didn't mean the minority had no power--in fact, there were many things they could do. Above all, they can play politics--if you only have 45 votes on your side, what you have to do is peel off six or seven Senators from the majority and you've made your case. This is how it's supposed to work.