From race42008.com:
...the Politico has an article discussing the judges Giuliani appointed while mayor of NYC. The article claims those judges have tended to lean left, and thus Giuliani’s past record of appointing judges conflicts with his present claims that he would appoint judicial conservatives.
This article is quite misleading. Anyone with even a slight understanding of NYC politics and NYC courts understands that the legal community in NYC is overwhelmingly liberal. The panels chosen to investigate and approve judicial candidates are controlled by the local borough Democrat parties. Thus, in general, the only candidates “approved” by these panels are overwhelmingly liberal Democrats. Ultimately, the mayor has almost no practical effect on the process, and is left to choose from the best of the worst, so to speak. Genuine merit or legal acumen rarely factors into the panels’ approvals. Tus, there is an enormous difference between who Giuliani was able to pick in NYC and who he would be able to pick as president.
Another important consideration, which is mentioned in the article, is that the judges the mayor appoints hear and decide low level cases that rarely involve any of the issues a federal judge would hear. In fact, these issues are so banal and tedious they are rarely heard by the NY Supreme Courts, which are the trial level courts in NY, much less the Appellate Divisions and the Court of Appeals. The judges the mayor is involved in selecting sit in City criminal courts (mostly misdemeanor and petty stuff), the family courts, and the Civil Court, which is essentially small claims court. Needless to say, these judges rarely deal with constitutional issues, with major statutory cases, or with issues that have major social/cultural implications.
In conclusion, there is almost nothing to infer from Giuliani’s NYC judicial appointments when attempting to guess who or what he might look to when selecting federal judicial nominees. The article is misleading and is an attempt to make conservatives (both judicial and social) doubt Giuliani and his commitment to place judicial conservatives on the courts.
See post 25.
Rudy himself cited his NY experience as supporting his contention that's he'll appoint conservative judges. So it's a legitimate inquiry. IMO the only answer is to point to the conservative, even if only on crime, judges he appointed.
Apologetics about the appointment system or political makeup of the legal community are irrelevant.
Rudy pointed to his 100 judicial apointments as evidence of his judicial conservatism.
Now it's "Where's the Beef" time.