THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, January 6, 1996 TAG: 9601050005
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Short : 50 lines
Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., claims he was doublecrossed by the Clinton administration over a judicial appointment. Now, to retaliate, he may offer legislation that would blur the print of the Constitution.
Helms believes he struck a deal in 1992 with then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Joseph Biden - a Democrat - to secure a seat on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for U.S District Judge Terrence W. Boyle of Edenton, N.C.
Boyle's credentials are not at issue. Though his father-in-law has helped finance Helms' political races since 1972, by all accounts Boyle has performed his duties as a federal judge admirably and is well-qualified to step up to the federal appeals court.
But the president makes these appointments, with the approval of Congress. Instead of elevating Boyle, as Helms said he was promised by Biden, President Clinton nominated two other judges to fill vacancies on the appeals court.
A fuming Helms announced last week that he is considering legislation that would require ``reconfirmation'' hearings for federal judges every eight years.
However, Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution provides federal judges with lifetime appointments and even forbids diminishing their pay while in office.
The only way to remove a federal judge from the bench is by impeachment. If Helms wants a second chance at confirming federal judges, mere legislation won't be enough. He will have to amend the Constitution.
Helms also says he is gathering support on the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee to block the president's nominations. But that's just politics-as-usual in the months prior to a presidential election. It was stonewalling by Democrats before the 1992 election that killed Boyle's nomination to the 4th Circuit, by President Bush.
While there is healthy disagreement among legal scholars about the advisability of lifelong appointments, it does not appear that Helms' move is prompted by his profound philosophical disagreement with the practice.
Instead, this looks like raw politics. And it's to insulate the federal judiciary from just such unseemly political pressures that the framers of the Constitution deliberately created lifetime jobs for federal-court judges. They were right to do so, and Helms is wrong to try to undo their work. ILLUSTRATION: Drawing
SENATOR HELMS
by CNB