Judge tosses suit that tried to rid Senate of filibuster

 

McClatchy Newspapers

A long-shot lawsuit challenging the Senate filibuster rules, in part over a contentious immigration issue, was tossed out Friday by a federal judge.

In a 47-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan acknowledged that the "filibuster rule is an important and controversial issue . . . as in recent years, even the mere threat of a filibuster is powerful enough to completely forestall legislative action."

Nonetheless, Sullivan added that he was “powerless to address this issue” for several reasons.

"Reaching the merits of this case would require an invasion into internal Senate processes at the heart of the Senate’s constitutional prerogatives as a House of Congress, and would thus express a lack of respect for the Senate as a coordinate branch of government,” Sullivan wrote.

The government watchdog group Common Cause filed the lawsuit on behalf of itself and several members of the House of Representatives, who contended Senate Republicans had used the filibuster to block campaign finance reform legislation. Joining the suit were three individuals who said they would have benefited from the so-called DREAM Act had it not been blocked by a filibuster.

Erika Andiola, Celso Mireles and Caesar Vargas, who were born in Mexico and now live in the United States, said the stalled immigration legislation could have helped them attain legal U.S. status had the bill not been blocked.

Sullivan, though, found they lacked the legal standing to sue and said they "failed to demonstrate" that the immigration bill or campaign finance reform bill would have passed if it weren’t for the filibuster.

Among other things, the filibuster requires a vote of 60 senators before the Senate can proceed with or end debate on bills. The lawsuit argued it is unconstitutional because it is “inconsistent with the principle of majority rule.”

Undeniably, the filibuster has become an obstructive tool commonly deployed by members of the minority party.

“The number of actual or threatened filibusters has increased dramatically since 1970, and now dominates the business of the Senate,” Sullivan acknowledged.

In 2009, the Senate counted a record 67 filibusters, which was double the number of filibusters that occurred in the entire period between 1950 and 1969. For the whole 111th Congress, which spanned 2009 and 2010, the number of filibusters had increased to 137.

As a result, Sullivan said, “many (bills) with broad bipartisan support died in the Senate without ever having been debated or voted on because of the inability to obtain the 60 votes.”

Nonetheless, Sullivan noted that he was “not in a position . . . to determine or predict what action the Senate might take in a final vote” on either the campaign finance or immigration bills.

Sullivan’s ruling followed oral arguments Dec. 10. It is not, however, the end of discussion about revising the filibuster. Separately, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has spoken publicly about potential filibuster reforms that might be tried at the start of the 113th Congress next month.

Email: mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com; Twitter: @MichaelDoyle10

Read more Politics Wires stories from the Miami Herald

  • Runoff primary to decide nominations for Congress

    The retirement of Republican U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss set off a political game of musical chairs that will be partially settled with Tuesday's runoff election.

  • Government drafting birth control accommodation

    The Obama administration is developing a new way for religious nonprofits that object to paying for contraceptives in their health plans to opt out, without submitting a form they say violates their religious beliefs.

  • Undercover probe finds health law failings

    Congressional investigators using fake identities were able to obtain taxpayer-subsidized health insurance under President Barack Obama's law, according to testimony to be delivered Wednesday.

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category