ConfirmThem

Curt. Thanks!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/20/AR200901...

"Democrats, meanwhile, at times engaged in unjustified filibusters and gross distortions of some nominees' records. During Mr. Bush's first term, the highly qualified Miguel Estrada was nominated to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but the selection was filibustered and never given a floor vote. Democrats hid behind a flimsy, bureaucratic excuse to block the nomination. The real reason for opposition: Mr. Estrada, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in Honduras, was seen as a top contender to become the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice.

Mr. Bush's second term brought the nomination of Peter Keisler to the D.C. Circuit. Opponents used a long-standing controversy over the number of judicial slots and the workload of the D.C. Circuit to argue against Mr. Keisler; that opposition did not abate when Congress settled the workload matter."

http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/01/...

"Kent Markus, Gov. Ted Strickland's legal counsel, is seeking a federal judge appointment from the new administration of Democratic President Barack Obama, Strickland's office confirmed today.

Markus is interested in filling the vacancy in the Southern District of Ohio created when U.S. District Judge Sandra Beckwith took senior status, Strickland spokesman Keith Dailey said.

Strickland "wholeheartedly" supports Markus' bid to become a federal judge and will advocate for it with the Obama administration; Markus has expressed interest with Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Avon, Dailey said.

President Clinton nominated Markus for a seat on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 1999, but the Republican-controlled Senate at the time bottled up a number of Clinton's choices, including Markus, in the Judiciary Committee."

Democrats (11)
Patrick J. Leahy, of Vermont, Chairman
Herb Kohl, of Wisconsin
Dianne Feinstein, of California
Russell D. Feingold, of Wisconsin
Charles E. Schumer, of New York
Richard Durbin, of Illinois
Benjamin L. Cardin, of Maryland
Sheldon Whitehouse, of Rhode Island
Ron Wyden, of Oregon
Amy Klobuchar, of Minnesota
Edward E. Kaufman, of Delaware

Republicans (8)
Arlen Specter, of Pennsylvania
Orrin G. Hatch, of Utah
Chuck Grassley, of Iowa
Jon Kyl, of Arizona
Jeff Sessions, of Alabama
Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina
John Cornyn, of Texas
Tom Coburn, of Oklahoma

On the Democratic side Senators Biden and Kennedy lost their seats, and Wyden, Klobuchar and Kaufman are new members.
Republican Senator Brownback lost his seat, no new Republican members in the committee.

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/01/senators-shuffle-membership-on...

"Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said [Klobuchar, Wyden and Kaufman] have followed the committee’s proceedings on Eric Holder Jr.’s nomination to be attorney general and will be ready to vote on his nomination Jan. 28.

In the 110th Congress, one ranking showed Klobuchar and Wyden with more moderate voting records than Biden and Kennedy."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/22/AR200901...

"This is all understandable -- to a point. Victory is exhilarating. There are no Supreme Court vacancies. With four vacancies on our 15-member court, the 4th Circuit may be the best game in town. With the new numbers in the Senate, the temptation is there to go for an ideological makeover.

Yet the tempting course would prove a misguided one. Of course there will be change, as there should be after every presidential election. While no two judges will ever agree on everything (regardless of who appointed them), the differences between appointees of Republican and Democratic administrations can be important. "I don't understand how someone so nice and so smart can be so wrong," I have told my wife. Her reply? "And did you stop to think, Jay, that they could be saying the same -- or worse -- about you?"

But these differences, however significant, are not the whole story. And ideology should not be the foremost criterion for selecting a judge. Many people may not believe it, but judges are not politicians in robes."

Wilkinson makes some great points in today's article, but that genie left the bottle years ago. Judicial appointments have been politicized in ways that would have been unthinkable 30 years ago, and they'll continue to be politicized for the foreseeable future. Despite what Harvie wrote, ideology matters greatly to both sides (their protestations notwithstanding).

A few other thoughts:

--The National Review's Ed Whelan is dead on today when he questions whether it is "fitting" for a sitting judge to volunteer his views in public on such a matter. I'd wonder the same thing.

--How do liberals view Harvie's op-ed? The New Republic (maybe not the most liberal opinion journal out there, but liberal enough) mocked Wilkinson's piece today in a blog post, noting that he never wrote any such op-ed at the start of (or at any time during) the Bush 43 administration:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2009/01/23/oh-how-conve...

--For what it's worth, Joe Biden has made clear that ideology should indeed be the foremost criterion for selecting a judge. Maybe Obama will overrule Joe on this point, but I highly doubt it.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/if-there-is-a-supreme-court-appointment-thi...

Tom Goldstein just updated his previous thoughts on the subject of a SCOTUS vacancy in 2009, and wrote that he thinks that if there's a vacancy this summer, it'll be either Kagan, Wood, Sotomayor or Jennifer Granholm (whom he calls a "sleeper" candidate).

Notable omissions from Goldstein's "new" list: Leah Ward Sears, Kim McLane Wardlaw, Kathleen Sullivan, and Margaret McKeown.

Goldstein's list is in line with what we've been predicting on this site for many months, though Granholm is an interesting new addition. It makes sense - attractive, legally erudite, and relatively young, Granholm is a liberal judicial activist's dream. She'd be a female, Democrat version of Earl Warren, only smarter - a conservative and originalist's worst nightmare. And as an unpopular governor with no chance of redeeming Michigan or her reputation in Michigan, she probably is eager to get out of there and move on to greener pastures.

Goldstein's always making predictions about courts, etc. What about Goldstein himself as a possible nominee? Is there any chance Obama would go with Goldstein for the DC Circuit? Goldstein is a distinguished SCOTUS advocate in his own right. Just curious....

Are Wood, Sotomayor, or Kagan ideologically distinguishable? Anyone know if one of them is a Brennan style liberal or if one is perhaps even to the right of Breyer?

I know Schumer suggested Bush nominate Sotomayor, which was of course a disingenous gesture. But is she somewhat a moderate -- or at least unknown on certain issues? It seems like she has been rushed to the top of the most likely list because she is a Democratic Hispanic circuit court judge in her fifties. Has her ideology been under examined?

I believe all the others on Schumer's list were moderates or mysteries. No one we would want Bush to nominate, but they would be better than some for Obama.

I've long thought that Tom Goldstein has his eyes on a federal judgeship. However, he's a little young still (~36). I'd say he's a very likely candidate for the DC Circuit in a future Dem presidential term (e.g., Obama II or someone else after 2020). What I don't know is how much his blog would work against him (i.e., how much ammo there might be in it). It certainly would give oppo researchers a lot of material!

Since we need to move in the direction of what other countries do instead of what the Constitution requires, her background (being born in Canada) would be a great asset. In fact, perhaps she could help establish a US version of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and give people like Rush the Mark Steyn treatment in case the Fairness Doctrine doesn't shut them down.

Oh yeah, what's that sarcasm emoticon again?

Obv, the economy & the wars are the main things at the moment for Obama, and judges won't matter a lick if the economy doesn't get turned around ASAP and the wars don't get won.

Be interesting to see when the ol' judicial train gets rollin'. Agreed that Obama likely throws a moderate crumb or two the GOPs way, to lay the groundwork for full bench legislatin'.

One thing about Granholm, I don't think Obama wants TOO big a resume giggle gap between his SCOTUS nominees and Breyer, RBG, JGR & Alito, tho God help us, both she or Patrick would likely get in, with Biden leading the way on "outside experience", "compassion", etc. Hopefully Biden shoots his mouth off way too much prior to the pick being made or after (and this will be an issue where he'll charge to the spotlight) and causes Obama a huge headache.

Gonna be a scary four years, but elections do have consequences. Maybe we'll get lucky and Obama will have a Rick Warren moment, and do the equivalent of nominating Kristen Gillibrand to replace Hillary. We know that he knows he doesn't have to pander to his base anymore. Best we can hope for, and Stevens is far out of the mainstream at this point, bet I bet Obama'll make a huge show of 'consulting' with Specter, Hatch & McConnell before picking one of the obvious libs.

Wilkinson sure has been chirpy the last few years with the editorials. Obv, he's a brilliant appellate judge, a great writer and would've made a far superior Justice to O'Connor or Kennedy. I sometimes agree, sometimes not with his editorials, but SUL is right; Wilky comes off naive at best with this latest. But senior status is looming and he knows he'll never be promoted, so I'm sure he doesn't care.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

I'm surprised there isn't much talk about Ahkil Reed Amar as a potential SCOTUS pick for Obama. One of the truly great legal scholars around today, he is politically liberal, Indian American, young, etc. He clerked for Breyer. He would seem to be without question one of the most qualified, yet no talk at all about him. Is it because he, as an originalist (albeit one with a leftward bent), might fall in line more often with Scalia and Thomas than the leftists could stomach?

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/specter-to-support-holder-nomination...

Specter to support Holder nomination

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, announced Tuesday that he would support the nomination of Eric Holder as attorney general.

Specter has been instrumental in slowing down the nomination, arguing that the Senate should not act until Holder provided more information to Senate Republicans.
Specter was especially concerned with Holder’s role in the issuing of controversial pardons while he was working at the Justice Department under former President Clinton.

“I am glad that Sen. Specter has resolved his concerns and will support Eric Holder’s nomination to be the next attorney general,” said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. “He joins the dozens of organizations and individuals across the political spectrum that for more than two months have praised the qualifications, integrity, and independence of this nominee.”

The panel will vote on Holder’s nomination Wednesday.

http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.NewsRelea...

If that long link is a problem, you can jump to it from his home page.

http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.Home

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/judiciary-committee-backs-holder-17-...

"Cornyn and Sen. Tom Coburn (Okla.) were the only two Republicans to vote against Holder."

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/01/eight-former-sgs-endorse-kagan...

"The eight most recent solicitors general -- including immediate predecessors Gregory Garre and Paul Clement -- have joined in a letter giving strong backing to Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan, President Obama's pick for the only position in government whose occupant is required by statute to be "learned in the law."

In the letter, sent to the Judiciary Committee today and obtained by Legal Times, the eight former SGs state, "We are confident that Dean Kagan will bring distinction to the office, continue its highest traditions and be a forceful advocate for the United States before the Supreme Court."

Highlighting Kagan's "breadth of experience and a history of great accomplishment in the law," the letter reviews her record as a Supreme Court law clerk, private practitioner, executive branch official and "legal scholar of the first rank." But most of all, they say, Kagan "has been regarded as one of the most successful law school deans in modern history."

Her tenure at Harvard, and its scholarly and administrative duties, "suggest that she will excel at the important job of melding the views of various agencies and departments into coherent positions that advance the best interests of the national government," according to the letter. "She will be a strong voice for the United States before the Supreme Court. Her brilliant intellect will be respected by the justices, and her directness, candor and frank analysis will make her an especially effective advocate."

The main signers of the letter are former Clinton acting solicitor general Walter Dellinger, and George W. Bush solicitor general Theodore Olson -- highlighting the broad spectrum of views represented. In addition to Garre and Clement, Charles Fried, Kenneth Starr, Drew Days III and Seth Waxman also signed on.

Dellinger, now chair of the appellate practrice at O'Melveny & Myers, was asked this morning whether the joint letter was aimed at blunting concern about Kagan's lack of appellate experience. Dellinger said no, indicating that it was motivated instead by the "considerable enthusiasm" shared by the former SGs as well as other current and former lawyers in the office about Kagan's nomination. "It took less than two hours to gather all the former SGs for the letter, and they were spread over three continents."

No date has been announced for Kagan's confirmation hearing, but it is expected to take place in mid-February. Longtime career deputy Edwin Kneedler is acting solicitor general in the meantime."

http://www.mddailyrecord.com/article.cfm?id=10621&type=UTTM

So perhaps Leah is *not* interested in an immediate COA job after all! Interestingly enough, if she becomes UMD's dean, she would of course become a resident of the Fourth Circuit and not the Eleventh Circuit. However, if she gets this job, she'll probably be off any immediate COA short lists from here on out; she's 53 now, and if she serves as dean for, say, five years (a realistic expectation by her board), she'd be 58 at the end of that and close to being actuarially disqualified from an Article III judgeship (from a practical standpoint). Even so, I'm sure Leah will remain a perennial *SCOTUS* contender under Obama; any dean with a brain would give up her deanship for the SCOTUS, but I'm not sure she'd give up her deanship for a COA job. Interesting news.....

http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2QxNDY2Mjc0ZjIyNjhhMWI1N2FkOWZi...

"In a letter to President Obama, Senator Specter has urged that, “as a sign of bipartisanship, you renominate some of President George W. Bush’s circuit court nominees who were not confirmed prior to the adjournment of the 110th Congress.” Doing so “would echo the bipartisanship President Bush demonstrated when he renominated” Roger Gregory to the Fourth Circuit. Specter identifies as nominees who “in particular deserve your consideration” Peter Keisler (D.C. Circuit), Paul Diamond (Third Circuit), and Glen Conrad (Fourth Circuit), all of whom “had bipartisan support, including the support of their Democratic home state Senators,” and all of whom were rated “well qualified by the nonpartisan [sic—oops] American Bar Association.”"

You'll be shocked, SHOCKED I say...

http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/01/29/kelos-little-pink-house-is-s...

Some of the comments are excellent too.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200901291333DOWJONES...

Way the system is s'posed to work, right? Judges judge, legislators legislate.

TBH, this one doesn't break my heart. Nobody denies Miz L got hosed by Goodyear, and the "boon for trial lawyers" canard went out the window long ago along with "fiscal responsibility".

Whole thing was the Senate's fault for writing the initial Title so convoluted that they could blame SCOTUS (and pander for donations) no matter which way they ruled, and they did rule correctly, IMO. This is why many GOP legislators are secretly terrified of Roe & Casey being overruled; they don't want to have to take a public stand with no wiggle room.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

http://www.committeeforjustice.com/blog/2009/01/specter-to-obama-renomin...

"President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear President Obama:

Congratulations on your inauguration. Throughout your campaign, you promised change and pledged to strive for bipartisanship in your administration, and you underscored this commitment to bipartisanship in your inaugural address.

I write to respectfully suggest that, as a sign of bipartisanship, you renominate some of President George W. Bush’s circuit court nominees who were not confirmed prior to the adjournment of the 110th Congress. To do so would echo the bipartisanship President Bush demonstrated when he renominated one of President Clinton’s judicial nominees, Judge Roger Gregory, to a vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Several of President Bush’s circuit court nominees had bipartisan support and were not confirmed due to asserted time constraints. I believe these nominees in particular deserve your consideration. Mr. Peter Keisler, nominee to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, had bipartisan support and garnered praise from across the country, including the editorial boards of The L.A. Times and The Washington Post. In addition, Judge Paul Diamond, nominee to the Third Circuit, and Judge Glen Conrad, nominee to the Fourth Circuit, had bipartisan support, including the support of their Democratic home state Senators. All three nominees were rated “well qualified” by the nonpartisan American Bar Association and would be excellent candidates for renomination.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to working with you.

Sincerely,
Arlen Specter"