Ilya Somin, who is scheduled to testify against the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, restates a position he and I have held consistently about Senatorial deference to a President's judicial nominees:

The bottom line is that Supreme Court justices wield great influence and serve for life. It is dangerous to give any one man unconstrained power to choose them. It is almost equally dangerous to give him unconstrained power to appoint anyone with appropriate professional qualifications, since the president can almost always find a technically qualified nominee who will reflect his views - even if those views may be seriously flawed or show excessive deference to the executive. The current confirmation process has many flaws. But one that gives the President largely unconstrained authority to pick justices would be worse.

I've presented this exact argument many many times. Now, where are the Nuclear Option proponents (when Bush was President) to rebut this argument today? Listen to the crickets.

Speaking for me only