|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
||||
A project tracking federal judicial nominations and courts.
|
|
United States DC Circuit Court of Appeals MIGUEL ESTRADA - Nominated Senators Discuss the Environment & Speak Out Against Estrada Nomination
Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy, Former Chair of Judiciary Committee The court’s decisions became increasingly less deferential to agency regulations intended in the areas of labor, environmental and consumer protections. These decisions were praised by Republicans and conservative activists. . . . I think it is noteworthy that it does not appear that Mr. Estrada has had any experience as a practicing attorney since 1989 handling cases within the special jurisdiction of the D.C. Circuit, such as . . .the Endangered Species Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (such as the following environmental statutes: the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6976; Superfund, 42 U.S.C. § 9613; the Clean Water Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300j; and Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7607) . . . Beyond the unique significance of the D.C. Circuit, with the Supreme Court hearing fewer than 100 cases per year, it is the circuit courts that are really the courts of last resort for nearly 30,000 cases each year. These cases affect the Constitution as well as statutes intended by Congress to protect the rights of all Americans, . . . as well as the best opportunity to have clean air and clean water ourselves and in future generations. . . . When a President is nominating individuals to tip the balance, stack the deck, or to pack the courts with a narrow ideology, the Senate would be abdicating its responsibilities to ignore the very criteria that led to selection of such a nominee. . .. When there is no judicial experience to look to, it is all the more critical that the Committee inquire fully into a nominee’s experience, record, views and understanding of our fundamental rights. Chairman Hatch argued for such inquiry when the President was a Democrat. In 1997, he told the Utah Chapter of the Federalist Society:
In the case of Mr. Estrada, however, the nominee has refused to provide us many answers at all about the types of jurisprudential views referenced by Chairman Hatch." Click here to see his complete statement. Statement of Senator Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT) Statement of Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) If confirmed, Mr. Estrada would make decisions about our environmental laws--such as challenges to clean water regulations, Superfund clean-up of toxic sites, and Clean Air Act regulations. He will decide cases such as American Trucking Associations v. EPA, which denied EPA the authority to establish health standards for smog and soot. The issue in that case directly affects the thousands of children who suffer and die from asthma every year. Mr. Estrada will be making these decisions as the Bush administration takes dramatic steps to curtail enforcement of our environmental laws. The administration has proposed rules to remove 20 million acres of wetlands from Federal protection, new regulations to weaken national forest protections enacted by the Reagan administration, approved natural gas drilling in Texas along the Nation's longest stretch of undeveloped beach, and proposed to scale back environmental reviews and judicial oversight over national forests and public lands." Statement of Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) These concerns are shared by the United Steelworkers of America, the UAW, Community Rights Counsel, Defenders of Wildlife, Earth Justice, the Endangered Species Coalition, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, the Sierra Club, the Wilderness Society, the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, and many other organizations. Statement of Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) The DC Circuit held that under the [National Environmental Protection Act], the [Atomic Energy Commission], as all other Federal agencies, must take environmental concerns seriously, must justify the burden that its activities would place on the environment. Our duty, the court said, is to see that important legislative purposes prevailing in the Halls of Congress are not lost or misdirected in the vast hallways of the Federal bureaucracy. There is no better description of the unique demands on the DC Circuit. It has sole jurisdiction over many basic issues affecting the people of our country. The Senate needs to know that the judges of that court understand the enormous challenge of ensuring that the important policies we seek to achieve are actually implemented under the laws we pass." Statement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) The court, in a 1999 decision, American Trucking Association v. EPA, demonstrated not only its deep division but its potential for circumventing the President and congressional intent. In that case, the DC Circuit decided not to review a ruling that struck down Clean Air Act protections against soot and smog. In fact, in the dissent, one of the judges said the court's ruling ignored the last half century of Supreme Court jurisprudence. When the case got to the Supreme Court, in a decision written by Justice Scalia, the DC Circuit was reversed. This was not a Republican or Democrat or liberal or conservative decision. This was a decision based on the precedence, the jurisprudence, the law. Many of the cases that the circuit court of appeals decides in DC do not go to the Supreme Court. Therefore, we have to be conscious of what a nominee's position is on environmental issues. Across the board, environmental groups have opposed Mr. Estrada's nomination because he has consistently evaded questions on how he might consider cases of vital environmental interest". Statement of Senator Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT) Statement of Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) Let me ask my colleagues this: Do we really think the White House and the Justice Department nominated Mr. Estrada without knowing his views and approach to the law? Do we really think the same kinds of questions we would expect to ask ourselves, maybe of our own employees or someone who was giving us legal advice, don't we think that process was followed by the Justice Department and the White House? Statement of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) In a case where you have a critical circuit such as the DC Circuit, not only the plumbing grounds for the U.S. Supreme Court, but handling environmental appeals, Superfund appeals, wetlands appeals, OSHA appeals, all kinds of administrative case law appeals, how this court is tilted becomes important to us, particularly if we take this job of confirmation of nominees seriously." (2003 EXECUTIVE SESSION 149 Cong. Rec. S2372-02, 2003 WL 327739 (Cong.Rec.)) Statement of Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) Every one of the rules the Senator mentioned goes to whether a person can organize in a union; whether a person can be discriminated against because of the color of his or her skin or their religion or their sex; whether a corporation can violate the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts and affect our lungs and affect our children's health; whether, for instance, an issue I know my friend from Illinois has been very much involved in, whether a meat packing company can decide how clean their plant ought to be, given there are Federal laws that govern them. The judges have all this kind of power. The very reason we debate these issues and have these rules is we want to make sure the people who become judges will, indeed, follow the law and not simply get up there and say: I promise you I will follow the law. We have been there. . . . I want to make the Government help people. I want people to believe Government is on their side. When nonelected judges come in and take years of work that Congress does--whether it affects disabled people, kids in school, the cleanliness of the water we drink, how a meatpacker has to obey certain laws, or the Violence Against Women Act--and throws it out on reasoning that 10 years before would have been regarded as crazy, the very least we owe our constituents, in my judgment, is the obligation--it is not simply a right, it is an obligation--to question nominees for the bench". Statement of Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) When you take a look at the groups that oppose Miguel Estrada, many of them have seen in his background areas of great concern. Consider the groups that have opposed him: The Congressional Hispanic Caucus-all members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus have opposed this Hispanic nominee; the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, which is the premier civil rights organization for Mexican Americans and many Hispanics in the United States, opposes Miguel Estrada; the Puerto Rican Defense and Education Fund opposes Miguel Estrada. And then more generic groups: The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, NARAL, Pro-Choice America, the Sierra Club, the National Women's Law Center, People for the American Way, and many others." Statement of Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) Statement of Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) About 50 percent of the DC Court's caseload consists of appeals from regulations or decisions made by Federal agencies. Fifty percent of the DC Court of Appeals caseload is appeals of Federal agencies. In many cases, the DC Court of Appeals is the last word, too, on Federal decisions. The DC Court of Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction over cases brought against the Environmental Protection Agency, particularly regarding the Superfund. When Congress created the Superfund, our goal was to ensure that the public health and environment were protected and made whole, particularly the cleanup. So decisions made by the DC Court of Appeals overseeing the Environmental Protection Agency obviously greatly influence whether the intent of the law is actually fulfilled on the ground; that is, in Montana or any other State in the Nation, because EPA is all over America. It is not only the Ninth Circuit where the Presiding Officer and I live. There is no question that in the State of Montana we have a terrific interest, a big interest, in who sits on the DC Circuit Court, given that court's influence over our Nation's health, safety, and welfare laws." Statement of Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) Wit[h] so little information to determine how Mr. Estrada will rule as a Federal judge on important matters of labor rights, rights of privacy, civil rights and environmental regulation, I cannot consent to considering his nomination at this time. Statement of Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) That is why the administration's repeated failure to consult with Democratic Senators on the nomination of Federal judges is so troubling. Refusal by a nominee to provide the Senate with adequate information to evaluate their record undermines our ability to carry out our constitutionally mandated duties. It is this latter point, the lack of information provided by a nominee to evaluate their record, which is particularly relevant to the nominee currently under consideration, Miguel Estrada . Mr. Estrada is nominated for a lifetime appointment on what is arguably the second highest court in the land. The DC Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over a broad range of cases, including issues from consumer and environmental protection to civil rights and workplace rules. The court's jurisdiction is vast. The DC Circuit has the obligation to interpret rules for access to courts which allow Americans to challenge the Government when any agency takes an action which affects their health. It is this circuit which is charged with protecting Americans to challenge the Government. It is this DC Circuit that has either concurrent jurisdiction or exclusive jurisdiction in cases involving the NLRB, OSHA, Federal Communications Commission, Americans with Disabilities Act, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Federal Elections Commission, Endangered Species Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency, just to name a few. Statement of Senator Herbert Kohl (D-WI) Statement of Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) Statement of Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Despite the importance of the DC Circuit Court, the administration is trying very hard to prevent the Senate from making an informed decision--an informed decision on Mr. Estrada. Statement of Senator Thomas Daschle (D-SD) Now, I suppose if this were a temporary nomination, if this were something within the administration, with a beginning and an end to the term--a commission, even a Secretary--perhaps we could let this go by, perhaps we should not feel quite as troubled by this lack of willingness to be more forthcoming. But this is for the second highest court in the land. And not only the second highest court in the land, this is actually for, arguably, the most important court in all of the circuits in this country. It is within this circuit that we find perhaps the single most complex, the most serious, the most hotly debated, the most contentious issues to come before the courts. Those who will serve on this court will decide the future of title IX, the future of workers rights, the future of campaign finance, the status of toxic waste cleanup. Those and many more issues will be decided in the D.C. Circuit. Statement of Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) First, I want to discuss the background of this nomination, which I think is an important factor for the Senator to consider. The DC Circuit, to which Mr. Estrada has been nominated, as many people have said, is widely regarded as the most important Federal circuit. It has jurisdiction over the actions of most Federal agencies. Many of the highest profile cases that have been decided in recent years by the Supreme Court concerning regulation of economic activity by Federal agencies in areas such as the environment, health and safety regulation, and labor law, went first to the DC Circuit. In the area of administrative law and the interpretation of the major regulatory statutes such as the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the National Labor Relations Act, and even the Federal Election Campaign Act, the DC Circuit is the last word, as the Supreme Court accepts relatively few cases on appeal from the circuit courts. Learn more about the nomination of Miguel Estrada.
Home | Search | Privacy |
Contact
Us ©2012
Judging the Environment |
Senator Statements
