Posted on 04/07/2011 12:54:08 PM PDT by SmithL
The nomination of UC Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu to a federal appeals court has been stalled by the partisan gamesmanship that pervades Washington.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is finally expected to vote today on whether to advance the nomination, more than a year after President Obama tapped him for the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has suggested that Liu is at "the very vanguard of what I would call intellectual judicial activism." The characterization of Liu as a radical does not hold up to reasonable scrutiny. Unfortunately, reasonableness does not seem to carry as much weight as political payback, which seems to be a driving force here.
Perhaps the most cited evidence of Liu's alleged extremism is his pointed critique of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's record during 2006 confirmation hearings. Liu offered chapter and verse of instances in which Alito took a disturbingly expansive view of police powers. Liu concluded with a scathing denunciation of Alito's "vision of America."
Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., called Liu's statement "vicious, emotional, racist." Liu has since apologized for his "unduly harsh" language.
Conservative critics of Liu suggest he should be held to the same standard - mainstream legal values - that he applied to Alito. But there is a fundamental difference between the role of a Supreme Court justice (who gets the final verdict on unsettled or ambiguous issues of constitutionality) and an appellate judge (who is obliged to follow precedent). Several prominent conservatives - including Richard Painter, chief ethics lawyer in the Bush White House, and Ken Starr, Whitewater prosecutor - have vouched for Liu's intellect, integrity and his standing within the legal mainstream.
He should be confirmed.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I guess it’s partisan gamesmanship whenever the loopy left wants one of its saboteurs to infiltrate the court and Americans spot the scam. But it’s just plain old protection of civil liberties when the same creeps Bork someone nominated by the right.
Give me more partisanship. That’s real diversity
The senate should refer to the following simple equation:
“UC Berkeley Law Professor” = “Wholly unqualified to be AY kind of judge”
...or even ANY kind of judge...
[Proofreading is our friend]
He should have practiced some of the "civility" liberals love to lecture conservatives about. Actions have consequences, putz.
And Orrin will be FIRST IN LINE to confirm this whack-job, super leftist.
That guy Liu needs to be Borked and soon.
This editorial grossly, probably deliberately, misrepresents Liu’s record — ironically, while accusing his critics of misrepresenting LIU’s record.
Liu’s horrific, perjurious misrepresentations in opposition to Alito’s confirmation are just icing on the proverbial cake. He’s had virtually no track record as a lawyer, none as a judge, and, worst of all, substantively would easily be the most far-left of ANY justice, including Douglas, Brennan, Marshall, Ginsberg, Sotomayor and Kagan. When questioned about those substantive views at the two hearings, he has simply lied his fool head off.
Berkeley has a few token sane ones, like John Yoo. But Liu isn’t one of them. Far from it.
“The characterization of The SF Chronicle as a sane publication does not hold up to reasonable scrutiny...”
What was the SF Comical's position on the "partisan gamesmanship stalling judicial nominations" back when W was nominating highly qualified minority judges to the appeals courts in California, and Washington, DC, and other places? Does the name Miguel ring any bells?
If Goodwin Liu gets confirmed, it will be a bad loss (get it?) for strict constructionism.
Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.