Kay Bailey's floor statement on Holmes:
Congressional Record
Pages S7550 - S7551, 7/6/04
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise to discuss Leon Holmes' nomination to the bench of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Article II, section 2 of the Constitution imposes profound responsibility on the U.S. Senate to advise and consent on appointments of individuals to lifetime positions.
I rarely voted against a judicial nominee or even opposed one under President Clinton. I have never opposed one under President Bush. On the rare occasion when I did oppose a judicial candidate, it was because a nominee had failed to show proper judicial temperament, or if questions about judicial philosophy arose, and there was no judicial record on which to base a vote of confidence.
I take very seriously the responsibility of confirming an individual for a lifetime appointment. These Federal judges do not answer to anyone after they take office. So when someone's views raise a question or concern and there is no record as a judge to show he or she can set personal views aside, I believe caution is warranted. For my vote, such is the case with Leon Holmes .
Dr. Holmes is a gifted man and a capable attorney. He has had a strong career and demonstrated commitment to his community. His rich spiritual conviction and work ethic are traits for which he is commended. I have listened to Dr. Holmes' supporters. I read statements in support of his candidacy presented by the Department of Justice. I know his distinguished career. I have read carefully his writings and public statements, including those for which he has subsequently clarified or apologized. I met Dr. Holmes to talk about his nomination.
Mr. President, we have made mistakes like this in the past. Last month a judge on the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a judge who was confirmed unanimously by the Senate in 1994 with my vote, made a disturbing public speech. In it, he compared President Bush's election in 2000 to the rise of power of Mussolini. The judge has, of course, apologized. We have all made remarks we wish we had not made. But in this case, coming from a judge, the blatant partisanship and political bias revealed by this remark, reduced the value of the subsequent apology. Now, it is a fair question, if a Republican-oriented litigant comes to the Second Circuit, can he or she be assured of an impartial justice by that judge?
In 1980, Leon Holmes wrote:
The concern for rape victims is a red herring because conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami.
I differ with him absolutely on this issue.
If one rape victim is pregnant, she deserves protections and rights. She is a victim our society must acknowledge. What of the 14-year-old pregnant girl--a victim of incest from her father? Should she be cast aside as inconsequential? If you talk to any person who has served on a grand jury, in any urban area of our country, they have seen such a case. It happens. Thousands of rape victims in our country become pregnant every year. The Houston Chronicle recently reported that the American Journal of Preventive Medicine estimates 25,000 rape-related pregnancies occur annually. Are these victims to be ignored by our laws and society?
To his credit, Dr. Holmes has acknowledged that these comments were insensitive, but in conjunction with his other writings, that isn't enough for a lifetime appointment to a federal judgeship.
My vote will not be in any way related to his views on abortion or his personal religious beliefs. It is based on his body of statements over a 25-year period that lead me to conclude he does not have a fundamental commitment to the total equality of women in our society.
I have supported all of President Bush's previous nominees. In each instance, if there has been a controversy, I have tried to make an independent judgment without employing a litmus
[Page: S7551] GPO's PDF
test, and without employing my own discrimination based on the nominee's personal practices or ideologies. In each case, I felt the candidate met the requirements. But I have a constitutional role that I must, in good conscience, uphold as I see it. I believe in the overwhelming majority of cases, the President should be granted his appointments to the bench. The role given to the Senate was to allow all possible information about a nominee to come forward to assure that a person is fit. Personally, I doubt that the writings of this nominee were known to the Administration when the appointment was made. But since his statements have come to the attention of the Senate, we must use our judgment about the overall ability of this nominee to give impartial justice in all cases.
I conclude that I cannot provide my consent for Leon Holmes .
I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
Judicial confirmation statistics:
Nominations Submitted 225
Nominations Confirmed 198
% of Nominees Confirmed 88%
Circuit Court Nominations Submitted 51
Circuit Court Nominations Confirmed 35
% of Circuit Court Nominees Confirmed 69%
District Court Nominees Submitted 174
District Court Nominees Confirmed 163
% District Court of Nominees Confirmed 94%
Pending in Senate Judiciary Committee without Hearing
Circuit
1. Terry Boyle (4th Cir.)
2. Susan Neilson (6thCir.)
3. Thomas Griffith (DC)
District
1. Thomas Ludington (ED MI)
2. Dan Ryan (ED MI)
3. Peter Sheridan (NJ)
4. Jim Dever (ED NC)
5. Robert Conrad (WD NC)
6. Micaela Alvarez (SD TX)
7. Keith Starrett (SD MS)
Pending in Senate Judiciary Committee with Hearing
Circuit
1. Claude Allen (4th Cir.)
2. Brett Kavanaugh (DC)
3. Richard Griffin (6thCir.)
4. David McKeague (6th Cir.)
District
1. Virginia Covington (MD FL)
2. Michael Watson (SD OH)
3. Michael Schneider (ED TX)
Pending on the Senate Floor
Circuit
1. Priscilla Owen (5th Cir.)
2. Carolyn Kuhl (9th Cir.)
3. William Pryor (11th Cir.)
4. Charles Pickering (5th Cir.)
5. Janice Rogers Brown (DC Cir.)
6. Jim Haynes (4th Circuit)
7. Bill Myers (9thCir.)
8. Henry Saad (6th Cir.)
District
N/A