Already asked and answered many times, but it appears EV is paid by the word to write the same stuff over and over.
Mitt Romney nominated judges who were tough on crime for the 36 district court and clerk magistrate positions he filled in criminal courts. They were not in courts that ruled on matters of constitutional law. Furthermore, all the nominees had to be approved by an elected, eight-member board dominated by liberal Democrats in Massachusetts.
David French, a Harvard-educated lawyer who works for the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) which is James Dobson’s organization fighting the ACLU, has written about Romney's record of judicial appointments in liberal Massachusetts. An excerpt is provided below from a post on the Evangelicals for Mitt blog which French co-founded. Emphasis is added for the critical facts.
_______________________________
"Regarding judges, here I think Steve blurs the difference between federal and state court judges and the federal and state (in this case, Massachusetts) systems of judicial nominations and approvals. First, when we talk about the Governor's allegedly "liberal" judicial appointments, we are talking about judges who deal primarily with criminal matters--not the constitutional issues that can dominate the federal judicial debate. Given this reality, Governor Romney did not nominate judges who were "liberal" or "leftist" within their job description. The Governor wanted individuals who were tough on crime. As he said, "With regard to those at the district court and clerk magistrate level, their political views aren't really going to come into play unless their views indicate they will be soft on crime." So the reality is that the Governor nominated judges who were tough on crime to fill spots that dealt primarily with crime. State court judges at this level have absolutely no say over abortion rights. None. Abortion is primarily a matter of federal--not state--constitutional law."
"Second, every one of Governor Romney's judicial nominees has to be approved by the "Governor's Council", a popularly-elected, eight member board that is dominated by Democrats (as is most of Massachusetts state government). Imagine a situation where the President of the United States had to run all of his judicial nominees by a Senate that contained 85% Democrats--most of them of the radical sort. That would change the picture a bit, wouldn't it? I think the best way to think of Governor Romney's track record in nominating judges is that he did the best that he could have done.
Prove it. Or apologize, one or the other.
In other words, since it is impossible for you to prove it, because I am not in the employ of any campaign or candidate, I'll await your contrite mea culpa for making such an accusation.
Can you manage a simple one word "YES" to just admit that this is true?
Then, explain why Romney appointed several radical gay activists to the bench, too. Also, while you're at it, explain why such extreme leftists also were able to find employ throughout the Romeny Administration as well.