Search results
A Prescription for Bipartisanship
From Texas, there is editorial board applause for bipartisanship in judicial selection.
An editorial in the San Antonio Express-News reports that President Obama nominated U.S. Magistrate Diana Saldaña to a federal district court judgeship after months of inaction.
The breakthrough on her nomination was thanks to the willingness of Rep. Henry Cuellar, a Democrat, to work in a bipartisan fashion, according to the editorial, which notes that Texas’ two senators are Republican.
Texas has six open federal district judgeships, and the senators and Texas’ House Democrats disagree on other potential nominees. This is a problem, especially for courts on the border with Mexico, the editorial says; it concludes with an appeal for further bipartisanship:
“It is long past time to put away political considerations. The Democratic delegation must work with the senators to find acceptable candidates.
“Otherwise, the judicial delays will remain another example of Washington’s pathetic dysfunction due to partisanship. Texans would rather have effective government than partisan scorekeeping.”
To learn more about how partisanship affects judicial nominations, see Justice at Stake’s issues page on the topic.
No commentsImpeachment, Condemnation Urged for TX Judge
When a judicial conduct commission gave Texas Judge Sharon Keller a virtual wrist slap over her handling of a last-minute death row appeal, “it could have been worse,” suggests a Houston Chronicle article. Far worse, in fact, judging by recent outcries.
Judge Keller, the state’s top criminal court jurist, was allowed to keep her job after the commission issued one of its less severe sanctions over the judge’s “We close at 5″ response when lawyers for an inmate wanted to submit a last-minute appeal (see Gavel Grab). The inmate was executed a short time later.
Here are some of the other actions weighed, or now recommended, for Judge Keller:
- “The Texas Legislature can help restore integrity to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals by impeaching and removing Keller from office,” urged the Texas Moratorium Network, according to a blog of the Dallas Morning News.
- “State lawmakers can and should pass their own resolution condemning Keller’s actions as unbecoming of the state’s highest-ranking criminal appeals judge,” stated a Dallas Morning News editorial. Read more
TX Commission Rebukes Judge Keller
Texas’ top criminal court judge will keep her job, although a disciplinary panel reprimanded her handling of a last-minute death row appeal.
The State Commission on Judicial Conduct gave Judge Sharon Keller a “public warning,” one of its less severe sanctions, and said she engaged in “willful or persistent conduct that casts public discredit on the judiciary,” according to an Associated Press article.
Judge Keller was accused of misconduct (see Gavel Grab). The death row inmate involved in the case at issue was executed on Sept. 25, 2007, a short time after Judge Keller refused to keep her courthouse doors open, saying “We close at 5.” Lawyers for the inmate had asked Judge Keller’s court if they could submit his appeal after regular hours, and the judge said “no” two times when the issue was brought to her attention by a court staffer.
According to the AP, a judge on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals gets assigned to keep working until an execution occurs. Judge Keller’s response on the phone amounted to an intentional step to deny the inmate’s appeal without sending his legal filing to the assigned judge, the commission ruled.
The commission “sharply rebuked” Judge Keller and said her conduct “violated legal standards for her office and effectively closed off last-minute legal avenues for inmate Michael Wayne Richard,” the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported. Read more
1 commentMore Senators Announce Votes on Kagan
Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter said Elena Kagan “did just enough to win my vote” for confirmation to the Supreme Court.
But in a USA Today op-ed outlining his views, the Pennsylvanian also said Kagan continued a practice of Supreme Court nominees hedging their answers to senators. “But her non-answers were all the more frustrating, given her past writings that the hearings were vacuous and lacked substance,” he wrote.
Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said he will vote no on Kagan. “I don’t believe that any nominee should be confirmed to the Supreme Court unless he or she has made clear that they will protect the fundamental rights written in our Constitution, and will not abuse judicial power to impose their own policy standards on the American people,” he was quoted by The Washington Independent as saying.
The Judiciary Committee, to which both senators belong, is expected to vote July 20 on Kagan’s nomination to succeed Justice John Paul Stevens, and to support her confirmation. Read more
No commentsSecond Day: Kagan Defends Justice Marshall
With Justice Thurgood Marshall and Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. “on trial” at Elena Kagan’s confirmation hearings, as one commentator portrayed it, President Obama’s nominee defended Justice Marshall today.
At the outset of the second day of her hearings, Kagan “defended her view of Marshall, for whom she clerked in 1988, telling the committee that he played a major role in making the principle of equal protection under the law a reality for minorities,” according to a Washington Post article.
Kagan made her remarks in the context of partisan clashing Monday “over judicial restraint and the proper reach of government,” as the Post characterized the first day’s statements.
Writing in Slate, Dahlia Lithwick focused on a largely partisan slugfest Monday where “Democrats really, really hate John Roberts” and Republicans accused Kagan of having clerked for “a well-known liberal activist judge.” Lithwick saw a theme arising from the political pounding:
“[T]he reason Marshall and Roberts are the ones on trial here is…quite plain: Republicans fear that, in this confirmation hearing, Kagan is pretending to be just what Roberts pledged to be (temperate, centrist, and humble), but that once she takes the bench, she will become Marshall (legendary, visionary, liberal).”
Among Democrats criticizing Justice Roberts was Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who took issue with the justice’s characterization at his own hearing of the role of a judge as impartial umpire. “For all the talk of ‘umpires’ and ‘balls and strikes’ at the Supreme Court, the strike zone for corporations gets better every day,” Whitehouse said. Read more
No commentsPanel Hears Complaint Against Texas Judge
The future of Texas’ top criminal court judge rests in the hands of a disciplinary panel that heard emotional arguments over whether she should be punished or exonderated.
Judge Sharon Keller, who presides over the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, was charged with misconduct in her handling of a last-minute death row appeal (see Gavel Grab). The death row inmate involved in the case was executed on Sept. 25, 2007, a short time after Judge Keller refused to keep her courthouse doors open.
In arguments before the disciplinary commission Friday, a prosecutor condemned what he called the judge’s “gross carelessness” in denying the last-minute appeal, according to a Fort Worth Star-Telegram article. Mike McKetta accused Judge Keller of violating procedures for the day of an inmate’s execution after she found out the inmate’s lawyers were laboring to prepare an appeal petition.
But a lawyer representing Judge Keller, Charles “Chip” Babcock, contended she had handled the matter properly, the Austin American-Statesman reported, and that death penalty opponents and other detractors were working to force her from the bench. Her foes had presented a “pack of lies,” Babcock argued, according to the Dallas Morning News. Read more
No commentsWednesday Media Summary
JUSTICE AT STAKE
Indianapolis Star: Who should pick judges? Indiana’s system works
Andrea Neal – 6/9/2010
KAGAN COMMENTARY
Washington Times: Kagan’s ‘full faith’ in same-sex marriage
Editorial – 6/8/2010
Blog Of Legal Times: Dellinger: Kagan is no Souter
David Ingram – 6/8/2010
NOMINATION/POLITICS
Witchita Eagle: Could Mother Teresa get GOP votes?
Rhonda Holman – 6/8/2010
Radio Iowa: Grassley to meet with Supreme Court nominee today
Matt Kelley – 6/8/2010
NPR/Political Junkie: Announcing The Official ‘Elena Kagan Confirmation Vote’ Contest
Ken Rudin – 6/8/2010Read more…
Wednesday Media Monitoring Summary
KAGAN COMMENTARY
CNN/Political Ticker: CNN Poll: Regardless of experience concerns, majority back Kagan
6/1/2010
LA Times: Setback may have set Kagan on course for Supreme Court
Christi Parsons – 6/2/2010
KAGAN PAPERS/EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
Center For American Progress: Executive Privilege 101
Ian Millhiser – 6/1/2010
NOMINATION/POLITICS
NOMINATION/DIVERSITY
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Huffington Post: Elena Kagan: Bench the Judge-Umpire Analogy
Aaron Zelinsky – 6/2/2010
Tuesday Media Summary
KAGAN COMMENTARY
Dallas Morning News: Questions for Elena Kagan
Editorial – 5/28/2010
Human Events: Senate Should Reject Kagan Nominiation
Kevin Gutzman – 5/29/2010
Miami Herald: Sexism, softball and the Supreme Court
JODI MAILANDER FARRELL – 5/30/2010
Human Events: Kagan’s Thesis Endorsed Judicial Activism
David McIntosh – 6/01/2010
NOMINATION/POLITICS
AP: Senators await Kagan papers from Clinton library
JILL ZEMAN BLEED – 6/1/2010
Kansas City Star: Bring on the Kagan hearing
Editorial – 5/31/2010
STEVENS LEGACY
Media Bistro/Fishbowl DC: NYT Scribe to Moderate Panel on Retiring Justice Stevens’ Legacy
Betsy Rothstein – 6/1/2010Read more…
Elena Kagan and the Rising Debate over Diversity
When President Obama announced his selection of Solicitor General Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court, he highlighted the diversity she would bring.
After alluding to Kagan’s late mother, the president said, “I think she would relish, as do I, the prospect of three women taking their seat on the nation’s highest court for the first time in history — a court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before.”
There’s no denying that the court never has had three female justices before. Obama’s choice of Kagan won applause on that front.
On other fronts, however, pundits and critics have questioned whether she would truly bring diversity. It’s an issue that is ripe for debate, so Gavel Grab invites readers to go through a sampling of the commentary and reach their own conclusions.
GENDER: Her nomination, according to a New York Times article, represented “a benchmark that women’s law groups celebrated as a major step toward a sex parity that has eluded the United States Supreme Court compared with the highest courts of several states and countries.”
Added Marcia Greenburger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center, in Huffington Post, “Having more women on the Court makes women’s meaningful representation part of the normal routine — rather than the exception to the rule.”
But. “The Supreme Court needs more mothers,” was the headline of a Washington Post commentary by Ann Gerhart. From a CNN commentary and elsewhere came another question, “Why no black female court nominee?” Read more
No comments