Cornyn: Sadly, Obstruction Didn't End When Pryor Was Sworn In

CORNYN: SADLY, OBSTRUCTION DIDN'T END WHEN PRYOR WAS SWORN IN

'This unfounded charge is particularly troubling,' Cornyn says

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution, made the following statement Monday regarding Sen. Ted Kennedy's letter to the 11th Circuit questioning the constitutionality of Judge Bill Pryor's appointment to the court:

"Those who thought the unprecedented obstruction of the President's judicial nominees would stop once they were sworn in were dead wrong. What Sen. Kennedy and others forget is that it was the Clinton administration which decided-in 1993-that recess appointments as short as four days or even less were justified. And I don't recall Senate Democrats sending letters to the Fourth Circuit questioning the propriety of President Clinton's recess-appointed judge to that court.

"This change of heart is not surprising, though. In fact, it's become a pattern. During the Clinton Administration, Democrats condemned the idea of judicial filibusters, but now support them. During the Clinton Administration, recess appointments were justifiable. Now, they're labeled as unconstitutional.

"Presidents since George Washington have made recess appointments to our federal courts, including our U.S. Supreme Court. Moreover, of the more than 300 recess appointments to the federal judiciary throughout our nation's history, the Pryor appointment is among the most justified of all because he clearly enjoys the support of a bipartisan majority of the Senate. Let me be clear: Pryor would be confirmed today if a partisan minority of the Senate would end its obstruction and allow a simple up-or-down vote, as contemplated by our Constitution. It's time for the obstruction to end."