In 2003, Miguel Estrada Was Dismissed As Bush 'Affirmative Action Candidate'

Photo of Tim Graham.
  • Bookmark and Share

The nomination of a Hispanic for the Supreme Court will remind conservatives of the case of Miguel Estrada, a promising Hispanic conservative that the Democrats filibustered -- at the circuit court level -- and in 2003, Estrada gave up the battle.

Here’s one priceless exchange from ABC’s This Week on February 9, 2003, with an ABC reporter now working as a talk-show host on National Public Radio:

MICHEL MARTIN: Miguel Estrada is a very promising young lawyer who went to some excellent schools, had excellent clerkships, has a good work record. What he lacks in judicial background he makes up with a compelling life story....And you know what that’s called George? Affirmative action. He is an affirmative action candidate as practiced by the Republican Party and the conservative movement....

GEORGE WILL: Michel, affirmative action, in the Michigan style, would be to give Estrada 20 extra points. He didn’t get that. He got the highest possible rating by the ABA.

Back in 2003, I wrote up the Estrada case for a Media Reality Check:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

On May 9, 2001, President Bush nominated his first batch of nominees to the federal circuit courts in an East Room ceremony. One of the nominees standing on the risers was Miguel Estrada. Liberal groups quickly decided to fight this 41-year-old Honduran immigrant tooth and nail. People for the American Way thought they were insulting him by calling him the "Latino Clarence Thomas."

Today, the Senate failed to end the Democratic filibuster of Estrada by a vote of 55 to 44 (60 votes are needed to end debate). He could be confirmed (Thomas had 52 votes in 1991), but liberal Democrats won’t allow it. Like Thomas, the hostility isn’t because he’s a minority – it’s because he’s a conservative minority, a threat to the notion that minorities should only think and vote Democratic.

This historic filibuster began a month ago. It’s the first time a cloture vote has denied a judicial nominee below the Supreme Court level. In 1968, the Senate filibustered ethically challenged Supreme Court justice Abe Fortas when Lyndon Johnson nominated him as chief justice in 1968. But ABC’s and CBS’s daily morning and evening news shows haven’t done a single story on the Estrada battle in the last two years. ABC’s This Week has covered it.

NBC Nightly News aired one story, on February 26, the day President Bush welcomed Latino activists to the White House to press for Estrada’s confirmation. Reporter Norah O’Donnell used soundbites from Brent Wilkes, "director of the nation’s largest Latino advocacy group," LULAC, calling the fight "unfortunate," but did not mention that the group endorsed Estrada. O’Donnell explained Democrats "don’t dispute Estrada’s qualifications, but argue he’s too conservative for what some consider the second-highest court in the land." She did not explain that Estrada was unanimously declared "well-qualified" by the liberal American Bar Association. She did say Democrats were "angry Estrada stonewalled them at the confirmation hearings." NBC carried one sentence from Estrada: "I don’t know that I’m in a position to say that I disagree with any case that the Supreme Court has ruled on."

National Review reporter Byron York has reported that the White House sent a letter to all 100 Senators asking for questions to Estrada, and promised he would answer by this week. None of the Senators sent questions.

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.

Read commentsFree email alertsTake action

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Funny how that's never mentioned

If a filibuster of an Hispanic nominee is certain to be a public relations disaster, why didn't the Democrats get stuck with it?

Let's remember that the next time a media hack starts a question with that assumption. Challenge the assumption.

It Never Will Be Mentioned

The Republicans need to keep the Estrada case out in front of these hearings! Digger-O-Harry says shes going to have a swift confirmation! McConnell has already soft spoken! I wish he would attack like Chuckie-Cut-The-Cheese did but it will never happen. The MSM [Mainly Socialist Madia] will ignor any references to Estrada or any of Bushe's picks! We have to put these clowns out of business as well! When we regain power as Conservatives, we need to shut the liberals out. We'll simply keep in tack the rules set down by Dungy Harry and Morticia Pelousy! When they cry we'll merely remind the poor babies that they made the rules. We'll also tie up every piece of Communist legislation coming from the Teleprez and the Kremlin at 1600 Pravda Avenue!

Liberal Double Standards

So, Mr. Estrada was qualified but too Conservative but Ms. Sorta-a-Mayor is ok because she is not too Conservative? OK, but how about too liberal? Oh yeah! You can never be too liberal! Also, its racist too oppose her because shes a minority who is too liberal but its not rascist too oppose a minority who is too conservative! Aren't these the people who cry "You can't legislate morality!"? If you can't legislate it then how can you make it from the bench? Do these clowns have any knowlege of the Constitution? When they weren't smoking pot and burning the flag, did they ever bother to read this document? Heck, I doubt they can read their pay stub! Small wonder they forget to pay their taxes!

"Compelling life story"...

MICHEL MARTIN: Miguel Estrada is a very promising young lawyer who went to some
excellent schools, had excellent clerkships, has a good work record.
What he lacks in judicial background he makes up with a compelling life
story....And you know what that’s called George? Affirmative action.

Wait.  Isn't the whole "compelling life story" thing the EXACT talking point pushed by Katie and Harry this morning wrt Sonia?  Did they forget to include the "affirmative action" part?  LOL.

At the time, even the

At the time, even the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund refused to endorse Estrada, because the life he lived was too far removed from that of everyday Latinos. [Show of hands:  Who thinks they will come out strong for Sotomayor?] 

And it was argued that he not only didn't start out disadvantaged enough (even though he immigrated here when he was 17 and managed to get through college and law school) but that he got where he was through affirmative action.

Linda Chavez said it all very well at the time

But of course, a Latina woman would never profit from affirmative action, right?  She pulled herself up by her bootstraps, probably in spite of rank bigotry and sexism all the way!

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.  -Bart Simpson

 

What the???

  "I would hope that a wise Latino (white) woman (man) with the richness of her (his) experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white (black) (gay) (hispanic) (asian) male(female)".

Sonia Sotomayer

 

Sub the descriptions in parentheses and it kinda makes you sick to your stomach. Where's the Pepto? 

come on lefties

You're so smart and enlightened and nuanced. Please man up and explain this.