Republicans attack judicial nominee's writings, experience

The Hill ^ | April 16, 2010 | Susan Crabtree

[Clintonfatigued]

Federal appeals court nominee Goodwin Liu’s confirmation hearing on Friday quickly turned into a partisan showdown.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee attacked Liu’s public remarks and writings as reflecting an activist agenda, and also said Liu lacked experience arguing cases before the Supreme Court.

Democrats aggressively defended him, and complained that Republicans were holding Liu to a different standard than used for Republican judicial appointees.

Both sides are watching the confirmation closely because Liu’s nomination to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals is viewed as a prelude to this summer’s fight over President Barack Obama’s second Supreme Court nomination. It also could serve as a test case for whether the Senate can confirm a liberal judge to a prominent federal court.

[Clintonfatigued]

This may be a prelude to the Supreme Court nomination. Goodwin Liu is a radical liberal activist who hasn't been forthcoming with the Senate Judiciary Committee.

[Jacquerie]

I listened to the hearing. Liu has no business on any judicial bench anywhere.

[Clintonfatigued]

You’re right. Liu is more suited for a straight jacket than a judge’s robe.

[Jacquerie]

I emailed the pubbies on the judiciary committee to thank them for exposing the fraud that is Liu.

I encourage my FRiends here to do the same.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

Liu was vile during Alito’s confirmation hearings .
Just vile.
Liu testified during Alito’s confirmation that Alito’s view of America was:
“where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy …
where federal agents may point guns at ordinary citizens during a raid, even after no sign of resistance …
where the FBI may install a camera where you sleep …
where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man, ..”
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) called the remarks “vicious and emotionally and racially charged.”

Sessions and Kyl were very aggressive in questioning Liu.
“ Sessions also questioned Liu’s criticism of Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito,
who both had extensive experience arguing before the high court and the appeals courts during their careers.

“Have you argued any case before the Supreme Court or the court of appeals?” Sessions asked.
Liu said he had never argued a case before the Supreme Court but had done so once before a federal appeals court.”

Barry’s nomination of such an unqualified , left wing bigot is clearly another middle finger to all decent Americans.

[Clintonfatigued]

Liu deserves a healthy dose of his own medicine.

[VRW Conspirator]

If past history is a predictor, then these ‘Pubs will talk a lot and then roll on us.

[Clintonfatigued]

I hope this is one they’re able to derail.

[Cheetahcat]

The next batch we elect better be like the Spartans No retreat No surrender this country needs to flush that toilet called DC.

[RicocheT]

Worth repeating,

“The next batch we elect better be like the Spartans No retreat No surrender this country needs to flush that toilet called DC.”

Find good conservative and moral candidates and elect them in 2010 & 2012.

[Norman Bates]

Were the Republicans making an issue of Liu’s resume holes?

[Jacquerie]

Yes, they did. The rats responded with tales of Roberts IIRC, (or Alito) doing the same thing. Yeah, right.

One GOP Senator, I don't remember which, a former judge told the law professor Liu that if Liu had blown off submission of such documents in his court, he would have disciplined Liu for contempt.

The pubbies did well. I hope the GOP leadership regards Liu as a special case worthy of a filibuster when he comes up for a vote.

Liu continually lied. When confronted with his radical writings, he consistently said to the effect, “Well, that is law professor Liu talking. A judge Liu would rule in accordance with the Constitution.”