Posted on 10/28/2005 12:40:49 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Region native on short list
Oct. 28, 2005
By Danielle Braff / Post-Tribune staff writer
A month after LaPorte County’s John Roberts was named to the U.S. Supreme Court, another Indiana local is being mentioned as a potential nominee.
Maureen Mahoney’s name was added to the short list of candidates Bush is considering to replace Harriet Miers, who withdrew her nomination Thursday after three weeks of criticism from fellow conservatives.
Miers said she abandoned her quest for confirmation rather than give in to Senate demands for documents and information detailing her private advice to the president.
Mahoney, a 1972 Merrill-ville High School graduate, said she is pleased she is one of 18 names being considered to fill the seat of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who will remain until a replacement is determined.
“I love my job as an advocate, but it is incredibly flattering to be mentioned,” said 51-year-old Mahoney, speaking from her law office in Washington.
She has been described as the female version of Chief Justice Roberts, whom she endorsed just months ago.
Mahoney, who said she still considers herself a Hoosier, lived in Merrill-ville from the time her family moved from South Bend when she was in the second grade.
She began her political career at the age of 19, when she interned for the minority office of the Indiana House of Representatives. According to Post-Tribune archive reports, Mahoney was raised in a mixed-party household.
While her mother was active in the Republican Party as a vice precinct committeewoman in Merrillville, Mahoney considered herself to be a Democrat and worked on the re-election campaign of former Sen. Birch Bayh. Bayh said he doesn’t recall her.
“Perhaps I should remember, but I don’t,” he said.
Mahoney followed her in the footsteps of her father, Marion Mahoney. He was a lawyer with the Saul I. Ruman law firm of Hammond.
Mahoney, who is now a Republican, is a partner in the office of Latham & Watkins in Washington, leading the firm’s constitutional cases. She gained notoriety two years ago when she argued an affirmative action case on behalf of the University of Michigan Law School before the Supreme Court.
She asserted that diversity is incredibly important in a university setting because it helps destroy racial stereotypes. While the court issued a split decision, her argument was viewed as a significant step for affirmative action.
Like Mahoney, O’Connor’s votes also have been decisive in rulings advocating affirmative action.
Before entering private practice, Mahoney served as a law clerk for the late Justice William Rehnquist and 7th Circuit Court Judge Robert Sprecher. She also served as deputy solicitor general under Kenneth Starr.
In 1978, Mahoney received her law degree from the University of Chicago law school and her political science degree from Indiana University in Bloomington.
Her achievements in law and academia are what may set Mahoney apart from the other nominees, said Ivan Bodensteiner, law professor at Valparaiso University.
“I guess one of the assumptions is that someone who has handled litigation before the Supreme Court is maybe someone who would at least be a quicker start on the Supreme Court, and Ms. Mahoney certainly has those credentials,” Bodensteiner said. “One of the attacks aimed at Ms. Miers was that she didn’t have the credentials. From what I know of Ms. Mahoney, there doesn’t seem to be a credential issue.”
However, Mahoney’s resume could be a harder sell to conservatives, who may have concerns with regard to her affirmative action support.
Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., who declined to comment on Mahoney’s possible nomination, released a statement Thursday encouraging justices to “put aside whatever personal views they may have on the issues presented” in order to have an “impartial system of justice that must stand outside the political passions and pressures of the day.”
Miers has been criticized for some of her beliefs. Conservatives questioned the depth of her conservative views on abortion, while Democrats were skeptical of Miers’ qualifications since she had never been a judge.
The last two nominations have proved by now that no reporter or news outlet in the country knows anything about who's really on the WH short list.
The last two nominations have proved by now that no reporter or news outlet in the country knows anything about who's really on the WH short list.
I hope that this trend continues, because she would be a terrible choice.
Some court observers said it was a strange pairing because Mahoney is a Republican and has represented such high-profile clients as the House of Representatives when Newt Gingrich was speaker of the House. "Mahoney is an unusual pick," an American Lawyer Media article said when it was announced that she had joined U-M's defense team.
Not so, Mahoney says. "I'm a Republican, and there's a common misconception that all Republicans oppose affirmative action," she says. "I care deeply about this case."
--------------
With Miers, I was initially willing to see what she was about.
I don't need to wait for Mahoney. Two thumbs down already.
If it's Alberto or this Mahoney woman, I'm going to break something.
Actually, wouldn't about half the people on this board tell us to wait for the hearings? :(
I am so proud of all of the FREEPERS who helped scuttle the Miers nomination. Don't think for a minute that you were not a factor! Now, seeing how the democrats are so busy trying to win in the courts what they were unable to win at the polls, we must continue to hold the President's feet to the fire, demanding a real Originalist for the Court. I am speaking of course of all of the indictments being sought. If they insist on making the Judiciary the real field of battle it is imperative that we place a trusted advocate on the Court. If we let this opportunity to shape the Court slip through our fingers, shame on us!
, seeing how the democrats are so busy trying to win in the courts what they were unable to win at the polls, we must continue to hold the President's feet to the fire, demanding a real Originalist for the Court.
I am with you there.
I think it will someone who has already been approved by the Senate for the Appellate court. It is the easiest way to avoid a big surprise.
I'll be sure to raise hell if the next pick is another racist/sexist. Accepting affirmative action is an all-out surrender in the culture war, and extremely dangerous from a national security perspective (due to the effect of the PC/multiculturalism dogma in facilitating the activities of our enemies).
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.