Know your "filibustees" (facts on Bush's troubling nominees)

Judge Terrence William Boyle -- REVERSED AT TWICE THE AVERAGE RATE

Nominated to: Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit

"...a right-wing judicial activist who has sought to roll back well-settled precedents and override the express will of Congress. His activism has produced many opinions that are, often in the name of "states' rights," hostile to civil rights claims brought by African Americans and people with disabilities, among others. Even the conservative Fourth Circuit has chided Judge Boyle for going too far, repeatedly reversing or criticizing him for subverting basic procedural rules and misconstruing clear legal principles."  
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=11

"Judge Boyle has been reversed over 150 times by the Fourth Circuit - twice the rate of the average judge. ...The Fourth Circuit has routinely criticized Judge Boyle for throwing out cases without giving individuals - especially civil rights plaintiffs - a fair opportunity to be heard. The Court has reversed him, for instance, for ignoring his statutorily-mandated duty to review the decisions of magistrate judges, violating procedural rules requiring him to give plaintiffs a chance to present evidence before dismissing their cases, and flouting other clear-cut standards prohibiting him from dismissing cases when there are contested factual issues.1"
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=11

"Judge Boyle twice decided that a North Carolina Congressional district drawn to have a population that was about 50% African-American violated the Constitution.2 The Supreme Court reversed both decisions. In the first reversal, Justice Thomas, writing for a unanimous court, found that Judge Boyle had prematurely decided in favor of the white plaintiffs before trial, despite the continued existence of factual disputes. In the second reversal, the Court found that, at the trial it had ordered, Judge Boyle committed "clear error" by attributing the state's district-drawing to predominantly racial, rather than political, considerations."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=11

"Judge Boyle has ignored binding precedent to dismiss civil rights claims brought by African Americans. In Ellis v. North Carolina, he threw out an employment discrimination case, saying that state employers were immune from suit. Because the Supreme Court had come to the opposite conclusion long before, the Fourth Circuit summarily reversed the decision in a three-paragraph, unpublished opinion.6"
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=11

"Judge Boyle was an aide to Republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina and, at Senator Helms' request, was nominated to the Fourth Circuit by President George H.W. Bush."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=11

______

 Richard Allen Griffin -- FRINGE VIEWS, ACTIVIST JUDGE

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit

"Richard Griffin has shown a willingness to interject his own conservative ideology into opinions. This strongly suggests that he will do the same if confirmed to a lifetime appointment on the Sixth Circuit. Particularly troubling was Griffin's request for Congressional invalidation of a unanimous Supreme Court decision holding that the ADA applies to state prisoners and prisons."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=83

"In Cunningham v. Dearborn Board of Education2, Griffin dismissed the sex discrimination claim of a pregnant custodian who was suspended after her employer decided she was ineligible for its "favored work" program. The program would have allowed her to work within the parameters of medical restrictions placed upon her. In deciding cases under the analogous federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Michigan federal courts had held that employers may not make a distinction between work-related disabilities and non-work related disabilities. But Griffin dismissed these arguments, pointing out that the court was not compelled to follow federal law, and deciding that Michigan law was much narrower than its federal counterpart."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=83

___________

 Thomas B. Griffith -- PRACTICED LAW WITHOUT A LICENSE FOR 5 YEARS, SOUGHT TO REVERSE TITLE IX

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

"Thomas B. Griffith, who failed to obtain a law license in Utah or keep a current license in the District during parts of the past six years, received a slight majority from his peers after an unusually long, three-month investigation. Under the ABA's system, that means at least eight of the 15 members on the review panel rated him "qualified" for a seat on the court, and at least six rated him "not qualified." The Washington Post Sep 30, 2004
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/news/clip.cfm?NewsClipID=314

FOUGHT FOR RADICAL PROPOSAL TO REVERSE TITLE IX RULES

"Mr. Griffith sought to eliminate the well-established rule allowing schools to demonstrate compliance with  Title IX by offering athletic opportunities to men and women in substantial proportion to each gender's  representation in the student body.  Mr. Griffith himself described his proposal as "radical."  The  Commission - which, with Mr. Griffith's vote, supported other law-weakening proposals ultimately rejected  by Secretary Paige - voted down the proposal 11-4.      Mr. Griffith characterized the rule he sought to eliminate as "illegal, unfair and wrong."  Every appeals court  that has examined the rule disagrees.  Mr. Griffith says that he " believe in the infallibility of the  judiciary" and that the courts "got it wrong."     Mr. Griffith continues to argue that "the Department of Education's interpretation of Title IX goes beyond  the authority it has been delegated by Congress." "
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=84
___________

 William Haynes -- TORTURE MEMO ATTORNEY

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit

"William Haynes III served as the chief legal counsel for the Defense Department, where he championed the legal doctrine that led to the torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. He advised the White House that in a time of war the President should be considered exempt from all international and domestic laws barring torture. Haynes also developed the "enemy combatant" doctrine that allows for United States citizens to be detained without trial, official charges or access to a lawyer -- forever -- at the sole discretion of the President.8"
http://www.moveonpac.org/team/0316/info.html

"Mr. Haynes has spent the bulk of his legal career as a lawyer in the Department of Defense and, most recently, as the department's principle author and defender of the administration's plan for military tribunals, its denial of Geneva Convention protections to persons captured on the battlefield, and its indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without access to counsel or the ability to challenge their detention."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/news/release.cfm?ReleaseID=136

"Pentagon General Counsel William Haynes is a career military lawyer who has almost no  courtroom experience to qualify him for a lifetime seat on the Fourth Circuit.  Haynes has been  nominated to a Virginia seat on the court, despite having no connection to that state that he  would represent as a judge on that court, and few or no ties to the other states in the Fourth  Circuit.  Furthermore, Haynes's close ties the Bush Administration and his active participation in  the administration's efforts to restrict legal rights for both citizen and non-citizen "enemy  combatants" suggests that his nomination is a reward more for loyalty and political compatibility  than for professional distinction."  
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=73

____________

 Brett Kavanaugh -- INSIDER, KEN STARR PROTEGE, PURSUED VINCE FOSTER MURDER INVESTIGATION

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

"Brett Kavanaugh appears to have been chosen for a seat on the D.C. Circuit only because of his involvement in some of the most ideologically charged political issues of his time. Kavanaugh has been a lawyer for a little over 13 years. He has never been a judge, or a law professor. He has litigated cases for about eight years but has never been involved in a trial. As Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's associate counsel, he pursued the unfounded allegation that Vince Foster was murdered rather than committing suicide, worked on the Monica Lewinski investigation and drafted the grounds for impeachment section of the Starr report to Congress. In addition, Kavanaugh was responsible for attacking the Clinton Administration's claims of privilege, testing the boundaries of executive and other privileges in order to gain more information for the Starr investigation...Since joining the Bush administration, however, Kavanaugh has become a zealous defender of executive privilege working to shield the White House from inquiries from the public, Congress and even historians wanting to see the papers of past presidents.  He has also been one of the White House's point people in the president's campaign to pack the courts with right-wing extremists."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=82
___________

 David W. McKeague - SOB

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit

"Michigan District Court Judge David McKeague is a staunch conservative with a record suggesting a bias against some plaintiffs, a predisposition to grant summary judgment to civil defendants, and poor temperament. McKeague also has strong ties to the Republican Party and to the country's right wing establishment; he has long been a major player in Republican Party politics. In 1984, McKeague chaired the Ingham County Michigan Reagan-Bush campaign, helping Reagan win a landslide victory. In 1986, he was on the Western District of Michigan's judicial selection committee. And in 1988, as George H.W. Bush's lawyer for the Michigan primary, McKeague successfully defended Bush against challenges brought by supporters of Pat Robertson and Jack Kemp. McKeague is a member of the Federalist Society....McKeague is only the second nominee ever to be granted a hearing over the objections of both home-state senators (Senators Levin and Stabenow)."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=71

"In this case, McKeague granted summary judgment to defendant school on claims brought by parents of several children enrolled at the Vanguard Charter School Academy, which is run by the for-profit National Heritage Academies corporation, but receives public funding. The parents had sued the school, alleging illegal establishment of religion and indoctrination of their children. They cited a room used during school hours for a "Mom's Prayer Group," from which students could hear prayers and Bible discussions; denial of similar access to an agnostic group; the prayer group's sponsorship of faculty luncheons and other events, and a group of teachers that convened students around the school flagpole before classes for a prayer meeting, as well as religious materials being distributed in the school during school hours and mandatory teacher trainings permeated with references to the Bible. McKeague held that, because the parents could not show that extra tax dollars were spent to fulfill the school's religious intentions, they had no standing to sue as taxpayers. And he dismissed the claim regarding the prayer group around the flagpole, stating that, because the student had not attended, she could not provide detailed information. As for the claim that science teachers had endorsed creationism and cited "God" when unable to answer a question, he dismissed those claims as well. McKeague listed this case in his Judiciary Committee Questionnaire as among his ten most important. Lawyers on the case alleged that McKeague belittled plaintiff's attorney and ridiculed their arguments."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=71

_____________

 William G. Myers III -- SOLD OUT ENVIRONMENT TO LOBBYIST BUDDIES, NEVER BEEN A JUDGE, NO JURY TRIAL EXPERIENCE

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit

"As a lobbyist and lawyer for grazing and mining interests, and later as a top official at the Interior Department, William Myers has demonstrated contempt for environmental protections and the rights of Native Americans."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=76

"He has never been a judge; he has never participated in a jury trial;"
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=76

"...the American Bar Association gave Myers its lowest passing rating of Q/NQ--a bare majority of eight or nine of the fifteen members on the ABA committee rated him qualified, a substantial minority found him not qualified and no committee member found him well qualified."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=76

 "In private practice, Myers was primarily a lobbyist and activist on behalf of the grazing and mining industries...Myers wrote that federal land regulations were similar to King George's "tyrannical" rule over the colonies and could lead to a "modern-day revolution" in Western states.  He called the California Desert Protection Act "an example of legislative hubris."  In Congressional testimony, he compared the federal government's reintroduction of Yellowstone wolves to England's requirements that American colonists shelter British troops. ...Griswold v. Connecticut and Roe v. Wade, as having been motivated by the "personal moral values of the justices . . .,"  yet went on to praise the infamous Bowers v. Hardwick decision, which upheld the enforcement of criminal anti-sodomy laws against gays and lesbians, as relying on a "neutral reading of the Constitution.  In a Supreme Court brief, Myers made far-reaching arguments in support of the claim that Congress did not have the power to regulate wetlands through the Clean Water Act."

"In a different case, Myers advanced another argument used by conservative activists to strike at critical protections, writing that "the Constitutional right of a rancher to put his property to beneficial use is as fundamental as his right to freedom of speech or freedom from unreasonable search and seizure." Since almost all government regulation arguably burdens property rights, such a theory, if given effect, could lead courts to the near-wholesale dismantling of our government's regulatory structure.

"In 2001, President Bush appointed Myers to be the Interior Department Solicitor, the chief lawyer for the department. Although as a high-ranking Interior Department official he was sworn to defend the public interest by enforcing federal land regulations, Myers used his position to weaken such regulations in favor of his former mining and grazing industry clients

"In the only two opinions he issued as Solicitor, Myers overturned environment-friendly Clinton Administration policies to benefit mining and grazing interests. In one of the opinions, Myers turned the plain language of a mining law on its head. His opinion led the Interior Department to reverse a decision by former Interior Secretary Babbitt and permit the Glamis Company to operate a mine on land sacred to the Quechan Tribe. A federal court reviewing the decision found that Myers "misconstrued the clear mandate" of the law.  Perhaps even more troubling, Myers and others at the Interior Department met on several occasions with the Glamis mine's operators while considering the issue, but did not follow the executive branch policy calling for government-to-government consultation with the Quechan Tribe, despite the Tribe's request for a meeting.

"The Los Angeles Times reported on a deal where Myers, without consulting the government's local land managers, supported a "private relief bill" in Congress that would have transferred federal land worth $1 million to a mining company Examining readily-available documents would have shown that the company had no right to the land, as the government's land managers claimed.  When the Los Angeles Times made inquiries, the department abruptly announced that it "was withdrawing its support for the bill."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=76
______________

Justice Priscilla Owen - ALBERTO GONZALES CALLED HER AN ACTIVIST JUDGE, ANTI-WOMAN, TOOK ENRON $ AND RULED IN ENRON'S FAVOR

Nominated to: U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit

" Anchoring the far-right end of a very conservative court, Priscilla Owen consistently supports big business and special interests against the claims of ordinary Americans...she has tended to distort or rewrite the law to reach desired results."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=21

"...in Enron Corp. v. Spring Independent School Dist., Owen authored the opinion for a unanimous court that held constitutional a Texas tax law that allowed companies to choose between two dates to evaluate their inventory for tax purposes.6 Owen's opinion saved Enron $225,000 and resulted in lost revenue for the school district, which had challenged the law that allowed companies to select the date on which their inventory would be valued, which minimized the company's tax burden. As reported in many papers, Owen had received $8,600 in campaign contributions from Enron prior to writing the opinion.
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=21

"In FM Properties Operating Co. v. City of Austin, Justice Owen strongly dissented from the court's decision to strike down a state law that had been tailored to allow a particular developer to bypass the city of Austin's municipal water-quality laws.9  The majority pointed out that the law illegally delegated a basic right - the right to pollute - to a private property owner. Owen's dissent was dismissed by the majority as "nothing more than inflammatory rhetoric" thus merit no response.10 Parties affiliated with the developer contributed more than $47,000 to Owen's campaign.  ... serious concerns about the priority she places on the government's responsibility to protect the environment and the health and safety of its citizens.
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=21

Although they served together for a relatively short time in 1999-2000 on the Texas Supreme Court, (now Attorney General) Alberto Gonzales wrote or joined more than a dozen opinions sharply criticizing opinions written or joined by Owen on the court. In most of these cases, Gonzales, a strong conservative on the court, was part of the majority that rejected ultra-conservative Owen dissents as ignoring the plain meaning of the law or otherwise engaging in improper judicial activism to try to reach a particular result. Gonzales repeatedly wrote or joined criticism of Owen's aggressive right-wing judicial activism.  Time and again, Justice Owen attempted to remake the law when it clashed with her ideology.
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=1726

A recent Texas law requires minors who seek an abortion to notify their parents unless a court grants a "judicial bypass" based on its finding that: the applicant is "mature and sufficiently well informed" to make the decision herself; notification would not be in the applicant's "best interest;" or "notification may lead to physical, sexual, or emotional abuse" of the applicant. In this particular case, the court ruled 6-3 that the minor had "conclusively established the statutory requirements to obtain a judicial bypass." Id. at 361. Owen dissented vigorously, accusing the majority, including Gonzales, of acting "irresponsibly."  She interpreted the statute as requiring a finding that the abortion itself was in the best interest of the minor, going well beyond the "notification in best interest" criteria required by the statute.  Id. at 383. In that case, Gonzales specifically wrote that adopting the dissenters' narrow view "would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism." Id. at 366 (emphasis added).
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=1726
__________

 William H. Pryor, Jr. -- RAGING FUNDIE

 Nominated to: Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit  (2004 - present - temporary recess appointee, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit)

William Pryor Jr. served as Attorney General of Alabama, where he took money from Phillip Morris, fought against the anti-tobacco lawsuit until it was almost over, and cost the people of Alabama billions in settlement money for their healthcare system as a result.6 He called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history," and has consistently argued against federal protections for the civil rights of minorities, lesbian and gay couples, women, and the disabled.7  
http://www.moveonpac.org/team/0316/info.html

"Pryor helped found and lead the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), which raises campaign donations from corporations that its members, as attorneys general, may have a duty to investigate, prosecute or sue. Documents disclosed after Pryor's Senate confirmation hearing show that Pryor may not have been candid with the Judiciary Committee about his knowledge of and personal participation in RAGA fundraising from Alabama companies, companies doing business in Alabama, and tobacco companies. He testified, for example, that he was unaware whether RAGA solicited tobacco companies. But the disclosed documents reportedly show that Pryor himself was assigned to solicit two large tobacco companies that ultimately donated $25,000 apiece.
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=87

    *     "Co-chair of the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign in Alabama, Pryor was the only attorney general to file an amicus brief in support of President Bush's position in Bush v. Gore, a case involving Florida - not Alabama - election law.

    *     A long-time proponent of gun rights and 2001 recipient of the National Rifle Association's Legislative Achievement Award, Pryor filed an amicus brief challenging a unique Texas statute prohibiting possession of firearms by individuals subject to temporary restraining orders in domestic violence cases. Alabama had no similar statute.

    *     An ally of big tobacco and a fierce critic of what he calls "leftist bounty hunters (also known as trial lawyers)," Pryor vigorously opposed the lawsuit that other states brought against the tobacco industry to recover the Medicaid costs of treating smoking-related illnesses. Pryor's staunch opposition to the suit, which he ultimately joined at the eleventh hour, cost Alabamians billions of dollars in relief.

    *     Condemning any constitutional right protecting "the choice of one's partner" as "logically extend to activities like prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia," Pryor submitted a virulently anti-gay amicus brief supporting Texas' one-of-a-kind law banning same-sex sodomy. In the brief, Pryor went on to suggest that states have a prerogative to recognize that "homosexual activity" is harmful and "exposes both the individual and the public to deleterious spiritual and physical consequences."

    *     Opposed federal court remedial action in the face of what he admitted to be Alabama's non-compliance with a settlement involving its foster care system, declaring: "My job is to make sure the state of Alabama isn't run by a federal court. My job isn't to come here and help children."

    *     Pryor called Roe v. Wade "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history."

    *      Pryor says he agrees with Justice Scalia that "the Constitution says nothing about a right to abortion."

    *      Pryor said: "I will never forget January 22, 1973, the day seven members of our highest court ripped the Constitution and ripped out the life of millions of unborn children."

    *     Pryor publicly declared that "the challenge of the next millennium will be to preserve the American experiment by restoring its Christian perspective.

    *     In 1997, Pryor, along with the Christian Coalition's Ralph Reed, attended a "Save the Commandments" rally in Montgomery, Alabama, where he stated: "God has chosen, through his son Jesus Christ, this time and this place for all Christians ... to save our country and save our courts.
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=87
___________

 Janice Rogers Brown - VOTED NOT QUALIFIED - TWICE, AND SEE THE LOONY QUOTES BELOW

Nominated to: Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

"During her time on the bench, California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown has taken positions hostile to reproductive rights, affirmative action, claims of discrimination based on race, age, gender, and disability, and worker and consumer protections.
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=50

"Justice Brown was twice rated not qualified by the California Judicial Nominations Evaluation (JNE) Commission.  The "not qualified" rating was based primarily on Brown's judicial inexperience, and her tendency to interject into legal opinions her political and philosophical views.  1Specifically, the Commission's report indicated that "nothing in legal experience her from other average practitioners," and some of Brown's opinions contained "gratuitous" personal opinions." 2 The Commission received specific complaints that Brown was careless of established legal precedent, had difficulty grasping complex litigation, lacked compassion and intolerance for opposing views, misunderstood legal standards, and was slow to produce opinions.3
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=50

"In Hi-Voltage Wire Works v. City of San Jose, 13 Justice Brown's majority opinion held that a "set-aside" program for minority and women-owned contractors violated Article I, Section 31 of the California Constitution (popularly known as Proposition 209, the section that banned state affirmative action programs on the basis of race, sex, color, or national origin). All seven justices invalidated the program, but, as discussed above, Chief Justice George and others wrote concurrences criticizing the breadth of Brown's majority holding. Chief Justice George, who concurred in the judgment but did not join the majority, wrote that Brown's opinion implies that U.S Supreme Court decisions upholding affirmative action programs were "wrongly decided" and that her analysis "represents a serious distortion of history."
http://www.independentjudiciary.org/nominees/nominee.cfm?NomineeID=50

"My grandparents' generation thought being on the government dole was disgraceful, a blight on the family's honor. Today's senior citizens blithely cannibalize their grandchildren because they have a right to get as much "free" stuff as the political system will permit them to extract...Big government is...he drug of choice for multinational corporations and single moms, for regulated industries and rugged Midwestern farmers, and militant senior citizens.
 - Janice Rogers Brown"
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=14177#2

"The United States Supreme Court, however, began in the 1940s to incorporate the Bill of Rights into the 14th Amendment...The historical evidence supporting what the Supreme Court did here is pretty sketchy...The argument on the other side is pretty overwhelming that it's probably not incorporated."
- Janice Rogers Brown, Speech to Pepperdine Bible Lectureship entitled "Beyond the Abyss: Restoring Religion on the Public Square," in 1999
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=14177#2

on the fringe of the extreme radical right, and insert their own opinions instead of following the law

and remember - some have no experience as judges!

More than 95% of Bush's nominees have already been confirmed

206 Bush nominees confirmed. Only 10 Filibustered. (95.4% Approved), according to People for the American Way.
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=14172

List of pending nominees to the Court of Appeals here:
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations.htm

By contrast

...while Democratic senators used the filibuster to block 10 of Bush's 229 first-term judicial nominees, the Republican-controlled Senate prevented approximately 60 Clinton nominees from even receiving a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, much less a vote on the Senate floor. And while Senate Republicans under Clinton strictly enforced a "blue slip" rule -- which allows one home-state senator to prevent a nomination from moving forward -- they greatly relaxed this rule under Bush to circumvent Democrats' objections to several nominees.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180004

...The Christian Science Monitor noted on May 12, 2003, "some 60 Clinton nominees never had a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee," which served "as effective a block to confirmation as a filibuster," according to Democrats. Similarly, as The Washington Post reported on September 5, 2003, "Senate Republicans enraged Democrats by bottling up about 60 of President Bill Clinton's nominees."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180004