Is the Bush administration suffering from Stockholm syndrome? A judicial nomination in Northern Virginia certainly adds to that growing impression.
Stockholm syndrome is the phenomenon of a hostage becoming an advocate of the views of his captors. Some conservatives already were complaining that the administration has fallen captive to careerists in the State Department who favor what the critics consider a weak diplomatic position concerning North Korea and Iran.
But diplomacy is often a gray area, subject to interpretation. The federal district court nomination for Alexandria is more clear-cut: The Bush administration seems to be fighting directly against its own team.
And this one isn’t a mere mistake, as happened with the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination, or a failure to engage in the fight, as when then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales deliberately chose a hands-off posture when Senate Democrats filibustered against appeals court nominee Miguel Estrada.
Instead, the administration two weeks ago nominated a lawyer, Anthony Trenga, who has consistently opposed candidates of the president’s political party.
To be clear, Trenga’s professional qualifications seem superb, with a long list of impressive litigation to his credit, along with a host of positions with professional service organizations.
But, at a time when Senate Democrats are blocking numerous Bush judicial nominees with no signs of reasonable compromise, Virginia conservatives wonder why Bush would nominate somebody whose politics, and presumably judicial philosophy as well, seem to lean so leftward.
In 2004, Trenga donated $250 to John Kerry’s presidential campaign against Bush. In 2001, he donated to Mark Warner for governor, and in 2008 to Mark Warner for U.S. Senate.
In 2005, Trenga donated to Tim Kaine for governor and Creigh Deeds for Virginia attorney general. In 2007, he gave to state Senate candidates Karen Schultz, Chap Peterson and Janet Oleszek.
And this year, Trenga has contributed to liberal Judy Feder, who is trying to unseat longtime Republican Rep. Frank Wolf. All of the above recipients of Trenga’s largesse are Democrats.
Several of Trenga’s other affiliations indicate a left-leaning orientation, including being the former chairman of the Alexandria Human Rights Commission and a board member of the Northern Virginia Urban League.
Conservative GOP state Sen. Ken Cuccinelli complained about the Trenga nomination in a recent e-mail to supporters. He called the nomination “a betrayal of grassroots Republicans,” and asked his supporters to contact the White House to ask that the nomination be withdrawn.
Cuccinelli also asked “Why completely capitulate and nominate a Democrat unless you’re going to get something for it, like getting one of our 4th Circuit nominees confirmed? The Democrats have let those nominations languish virtually indefinitely.”
For conservatives, that’s where the real issue lies. If Senate Democrats had dealt straight with President Bush’s judicial nominees overall, then a few Bush district court nominations of Democrats with distinguished legal records would not raise many eyebrows. But Senate Democrats have not played fair.
For the first time in American history, they filibustered numerous judicial nominations to death. They blocked some nominees even when the nominees met the Democrats’ own, previously stated qualifications for approval. They have approved far fewer Bush nominees than the number of Democratic nominees approved by the previous Republican-majority Senate.
And, most to the point in Virginia, they have been particularly harsh in blocking nominees to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals — which covers Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland and the Carolinas — so that the circuit is officially listed as a “judicial emergency,” unable to adequately keep up with its caseload because four of its 15 bench seats are unfilled.
With the left using explicitly political considerations to block Bush’s own choices, why would the president appoint a political opponent without receiving anything in return? Moreover, this particular district court arguably is the nation’s most important for national security cases, because most of the war-on-terror cases are tried there. Why Bush would fail to fight to put a conservative on that court is a mystery.
Virginia’s two U.S. senators, Republican John Warner and Democrat Jim Webb, included Trenga on a list of seven potential nominees they endorsed. All seem well-credentialed, and several appear to have career pedigrees that show center-right outlooks instead of Trenga’s more liberal one.
Have Senate Democrats held Bush’s judicial nominees hostage for so long that the president is succumbing to his oppressors’ outlook?
