A project tracking federal judicial nominations and courts.
|
|
|
 Editorials and Opinion
|
One Year and Waiting -- The Nomination of Edward M. Chen (Huffington Post, 09/02/10)
Kenneth K. Lee, former Associate Counsel to President George W. Bush (judicial nominations): "None of the arguments offered in opposition to Judge Chen's nomination, when examined closely, has merit."
Burr should pressure GOP not to block N.C. judge (Asheville Citizen-Times, 09/01/10)
"Senate Republican holds (threatened filibusters) continue to freeze judicial nominees. These include Diaz, whom the Judiciary Committee approved (19-0) the same day as Wynn more than six months ago; and N.C. federal district court nominee Catherine Eagles (also approved in committee without dissent months ago). Sen. Burr is unable or unwilling to convince his fellow Republicans to allow votes on Diaz and Eagles." Glenn Sugameli, Letter to the Editor
GOP blockage (Wichita Eagle, 08/31/10)
"Senate Republicans continue unprecedented across-the-board blockages, regardless of the merits, of judicial nominees. They will not allow the Senate to vote on more than 20 judicial nominees who were approved in committee, including many endorsed without dissent months ago. Federal judicial vacancies have risen to more than 100." Glenn Sugameli, Letter to the Editor
Judicial Nominees Still Being Blocked (Pilot (So Pines, NC), 08/30/10)
"After an Aug. 4 Public Policy Polling survey showed North Carolina voters overwhelmingly (58 percent to 16 percent) supported prompt votes on Diaz and Wynn, senators finally confirmed Judge Wynn by unanimous consent. Sen. Richard Burr’s press release, however, absurdly stated: “I hope the majority leader will put political gamesmanship aside and make the confirmation of Judge Diaz a priority.” Senate Republican holds (threatened filibusters) continue the “virtual freeze” on judicial nominees. These include Diaz, whom the Judiciary Committee approved (19-0) the same day as Wynn more than six months ago; and N.C. federal district court nominee Catherine Eagles, who was also approved in committee without dissent months ago." Glenn Sugameli, Letter to the Editor
Senate needs to fill judge vacancies (Atlanta Journal Constitution, 08/26/10)
Prof. Carl Tobias: " President Barack Obama should promptly nominate, and the Senate must expeditiously confirm, lower court judges, so that the bench will be at full strength. ... Obama has selected 22 consensus appeals court nominees who possess even temperament and are intelligent, ethical, hard working and independent as well as diverse vis-à-vis ethnicity, gender and ideology."
Editorial: High court needs Kagan to take her seat on the bench (Aurora Sentinel [CO], 08/24/10)
"Critics like Republican Senator Mitch McConnell were simply looking for any issue, hoping to have some basis of opposing the appointment of Kagan, but the “no-judicial experience” dog didn’t hunt.... She is unquestionably qualified to sit on the high court."
Stem cells, politics and the law (Guardian News and Media, 08/24/10)
Michael Tomasky's blog: "ho sat on this three-judge panel? They were: Janice Rogers-Brown, Brett Kavanaugh and Douglas Ginsburg. All Republicans. The first two very ideological Republicans.... Why did this question go to three conservatives? Part of the reason may be that Obama has not filled two vacancies on the DC Circuit. The two seats have been vacant since he took office, and they're still vacant.
His fault? Maybe. But everyone who knows anything knows that whatever appointments he'd tried to make would now be languishing in the circle of hell known as the senatorial hold.... There is no way the Senate Republicans are going to let Obama reshape the DC Circuit. ... Rogers-Brown and Kavanaugh did get on, didn't they? Imagine if Obama tried to nominate someone who'd been, say, a Democratic lawyer who investigated the Bush administration for war crimes or sued the government on Gitmo detentions (i.e., a rough Kavanaugh parallel).
So this decision from yesterday is where GOP Senate obstructionism isn't just about politics and actively hurts the republic."
No justice in partisan fight over judges (San Francisco Chronicle, 08/22/10)
Mark Greenbaum: "In perhaps no other area is Congress' crisis of leadership more glaring than with judicial nominations. ... since President Obama was inaugurated, confirmations have come to a standstill as Republicans block even the most non-controversial nominees. The fight over judges paralyzes the administration of justice and provides the perfect lens into the Senate's failings."
H. Brandt Ayers: The glacial Senate (Anniston Star, 08/21/10)
Anniston Star publisher: "How diminished does the current Senate minority leader, thin-lipped, taciturn Mitch McConnell, seem in comparison with the looming ghostly presence of his predecessor.
And how puny the task he has set for himself and his party, a mission he has the craft and iron discipline to enforce in the GOP caucus: it is to stop or at least delay every appointment or bill sent to the chamber by the president.
As a list of 56 appointments to judgeships or key executive posts was read in the Senate, Minority Whip John Kyl of Arizona objected to each, a single member stalling the work of government."
Editorial: Senate has become dysfunctional (Carroll County Times [MD], 08/20/10)
"At the least, the senate rules should be changed so that a senator placing a block on legislation would have to reveal himself or herself and stand in the open to defend why they used the blocking tactic."
The Case Against Restrictive Constitutional Standing Requirements (Volokh Conspiracy, 08/19/10)
Ilya Somin: “constitutional” standing requirements are both a bad idea and not required by the Constitution. ...Perhaps “case” and “controversy” were eighteenth century terms of art that required a narrowly defined harm as a prerequisite for standing. But the historical evidence doesn’t support any such claim. ...The real purpose of “standing” doctrine is not to keep out frivolous cases, but to make it more difficult to bring meritorious ones, and thereby insulate potentially unconstitutional practices from legal challenge."
Editorial: No Names, Please (New York Times, 08/19/10)
"A rare bipartisan move is afoot to crimp one of the clubby abuses of the United States Senate — the “secret hold” that lone lawmakers employ anonymously to block worthy bills and nominees.... A proposal to shine a public light on the obstructers deserves to be enacted, holds-free, as soon as the Senate returns from recess."
Burr should do more to move Diaz confirmation through U.S. Senate (Rocky Mount Telegram, 08/17/10)
Published Glenn Sugameli Letter to the Editor: "Sen. Burr’s press release absurdly states: “I hope the Majority Leader will put political gamesmanship aside and make the confirmation of Judge Diaz a priority.”
Senate Republican holds (threatened filibusters) have blocked floor votes on many nominees. These include Diaz, whom the Judiciary Committee approved (19-0) the same day as Wynn more than six months ago; and N.C. Federal District Court nominee Catherine Eagles, who was also approved in committee without dissent months ago.
While 58 percent of North Carolina voters support a prompt vote on Diaz (Public Policy Polling survey), Sen. Burr is unable or unwilling to convince his Republican colleagues to allow a vote."
Republican Obstructionism on Judges (Huffington Post, 08/17/10)
Prof. Geoffrey R. Stone: "The stunning thing about the first eighteen months of President Obama's term, however, is not only that the Senate has confirmed only 42% of his nominees - the lowest confirmation rate in American history, but also that this is happening even though the Democrats hold a 59-41 majority in the Senate.
Thus, it is no longer the majority that is blocking judicial confirmations, but a fiercely obstructionist minority. ... Using a variety of parliamentary maneuvers, the 41-member Republican minority has successfully paralyzed our federal courts - even with respect to nominees who have been unanimously approved by the bipartisan Senate Judiciary Committee."
Our own Party of No (Indianapolis Star, 08/16/10)
Sheila Kennedy: "Republicans have blocked votes on the DISCLOSE Act (increasing disclosure and reporting requirements in the wake of the Supreme Court decision allowing corporations to make direct campaign contributions), a bill to provide medical aid and compensation for 9/11 first responders, and a bill to expand credit to small businesses. Republicans also have blocked votes on at least 20 judicial nominees who received bipartisan support in committee.
What is appalling about this behavior is its transparent motivation to deny the administration credit for getting anything done, even when the measures being proposed have previously been supported by Republicans."
Kagan beats the confirmation obstacle course: editorial (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 08/15/10)
"[A]t least Supreme Court nominees get a vote. ... Benita Pearson, a highly regarded former federal prosecutor, is among 17 judicial candidates on hold. Recommended by a bipartisan committee of lawyers chosen by Voinovich and his Democratic colleague Sherrod Brown, Pearson was nominated by President Obama to a seat on the U.S. District Court in Youngstown last December.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved her on a party-line vote in February. Since then, nothing has happened."
Editorial: Unfair: Senate imbalance (Charleston Gazette (WV), 08/13/10)
"Without unanimous consent, the Senate must go through a laborious, time-consuming process to scrape up 60 votes needed to make floor action possible.... two-thirds of senators -- mostly Democrats -- signed a letter pledging never to apply secret holds, and now Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is pushing the Secret Holds Elimination Act.
... We hope West Virginia's two senators, Jay Rockefeller and Carte Goodwin, enthusiastically support this cleanup reform."
Side of the Rhode: Who’s Hot and Who’s Not in RI Politics? (GoLocalProv, 08/13/10)
Matt Jerzyk: "WHO'S NOT: Senate Republicans -> Shame on this group of Senators who - en masse - left the U.S. Capitol without allowing the nomination of Jack McConnell to the RI federal bench to be continued and considered by the Senate. For years on end, these same Republicans complained that President Bush's judicial nominees were not being allowed to have an "up or down" vote on the merits. Now, Senate Republicans are engaged in the same gamesmanship. McConnell, who has broad support across Rhode Island - including the business, Republican and legal communities - deserves an up or down vote on the merits of his nomination."
Editorial: The Report Card for Aug. 13 (Asheville Citizen-Times, 08/13/10)
"D to the confirmation of Judge James Wynn Jr., a North Carolinian, to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 4th covers North and South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia and Maryland. We're giving a D not because of Judge Wynn's qualifications — he's a fine, fine jurist and only the second Tar Heel currently serving on the 15-member court. We're giving a D because of the unacceptably glacial progress made here; Wynn was first nominated 11 years ago. The seat he will occupy has been vacant for 16 years. It's old enough to get a learner's permit. Slow processes are one thing, but this is ridiculous. So D for “disgraceful.”"
Editorial: Supreme Court reflects modern-day America (Gary Post-Tribune [IN], 08/13/10)
"Critics of the Supreme Court's demographic evolution grump about special interest groups and affirmative action. But we see something else at work -- an expanding meritocracy that is supplanting the old boys' club."
Why North Carolina can't afford to wait for Washington (Charlotte Observer, 08/12/10)
Op-Ed by Damon Circosta, executive director of the N.C. Center for Voter Education: "two North Carolina judges sat in limbo as they waited for confirmation of their appointments to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The judges - Jim Wynn of the N.C. Court of Appeals and Albert Diaz of the Superior Court in Mecklenburg County - are backed by Republicans and Democrats, but have been caught up in the usual political maneuvering that has gridlocked Capitol Hill. Last week, Wynn's confirmation finally came through. Diaz still waits."
Senior editor Dan Morain: Fiorina still fuzzy on judicial nominees (Sacramento Bee, 08/12/10)
"Magistrate Judge Kimberly Mueller of Sacramento, has stalled for no good reason, except that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky objected to her confirmation.
Republicans are blocking two other nominees because they can, including Obama's first nominee to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, UC Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu. Sen. Dianne Feinstein proclaimed Liu to be "worthy." But he has run afoul of conservatives, among them Edwin Meese, attorney general under President Ronald Reagan, and several California district attorneys."
Editorial: Senate politics obstruct justice (Sacramento Bee, 08/11/10)
"Senate Republicans, who unfortunately want to stop Liu on ideological grounds, forced his nomination to be sent back to the White House. ... There's no such drama surrounding Mueller. By dawdling in their constitutional duty to advise and consent, senators are also delaying justice."
With Wynn confirmed, it’s Diaz’s turn for a vote (Greensboro News & Record [NC], 08/11/10)
Published Letter to the Editor from Judging the Environment's Glenn Sugameli: "The question remains: Why has Sen. Richard Burr’s impotent support for Judge Diaz not convinced his fellow Republicans to allow a floor vote during the more than six months since the Judiciary Committee voted 19-0 to approve Diaz on the same day it approved Wynn? A new Public Policy Polling survey found that 58 percent of North Carolina voters said that the U.S. Senate should vote as soon as possible on both judges."
Editorial: Judge's life experience? Yes, it matters (Oregonian, 08/11/10)
"Clearly, though, the evolving diversity of our courts does have some bearing on protection of our liberties. That there were no Japanese Americans on the high court in 1944 did make a difference. It not only reflected the engrained prejudice of that time -- the same prejudice that made the internment order seem plausible -- but also helped to sustain that prejudice.
Today, by the way, there still aren't any Asian American justices on the Supreme Court. And, according to the Asian American Justice Center, of about 875 federal judgeships, only 11are held by Asian Pacific Americans. (President Obama has nominated eight, of whom four have been confirmed.)"
|
