Obama interviews Diane Wood for Supreme Court

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama interviewed federal judge Diane Wood of Chicago on Tuesday for an upcoming opening on the Supreme Court, a person familiar with the conversation told The Associated Press.

She is the fourth candidate for the job known to have had face-to-face talks with the president.

Bio

Wood graduated with a B.A., receiving highest honors and special honors in English, from the University of Texas at Austin’s Plan II Honors program in 1971. She earned her J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 1975, where she was an editor of the Texas Law Review, graduating with high honors and Order of the Coif.

After law school, Judge Wood clerked for Federal Appeals Judge Irving Goldberg of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals based in New Orleans in 1975 and for former United States Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun in 1976. After a brief period at as a Legal Adviser of the US State Department from 1977 to 1978, she practiced at Covington & Burling from 1978 to 1980 in Washington, DC where she had a wide-ranging litigation practice with particular emphasis on antitrust and economic issues pertaining to businesses. In 1980, Wood served on the faculty of Georgetown Law School. In 1981, she was appointed to the University of Chicago Law School faculty where she served as Associate Dean from 1989 through 1992. In 1990, she was named the Harold J. and Marion F. Green Chair in International Legal Studies becoming the first woman at the Law School to be honored with a named chair.

Immediately prior to joining the Seventh Circuit Court, Judge Wood was a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice from September 1993 through July 1995. In this role, she was responsible for appellate matters and international enforcement of trade laws affecting the United States.

Judge Wood was appointed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals by President Bill Clinton on June 30, 1995 upon the recommendation of Senator Dick Durbin.

Notable rulings

* Walker v. O’Brien, 216 F.3d 626 (7th Cir. 2000): Wood, writing for the panel, held that the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act do not apply to properly characterized habeas corpus actions because those actions are not “civil actions” within the meaning of the Act.

* Fornalik v. Perryman, 223 F.3d 523 (7th Cir. 2000): Wood, writing for the panel, held that an INS district office order putting a minor alien in deferred status pending an application to proceed as an abused child of a visa recipient under the Violence Against Women Act took precedence over an earlier removal order issued by another INS district office.

* Goldwasser v. Ameritech Corp., 222 F.3d 390 (7th Cir. 2000): Wood, writing for the panel, held that a violation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act was not sufficient to state a claim under general antitrust laws.

* Illinois ex rel. Ryan v. Brown, 227 F.3d 1042 (7th Cir. 2000): Wood, writing for the panel, held that the State of Illinois itself, rather than taxpayer plaintiffs, was the correct party to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to recover losses stemming from a corrupt loan to public official.

* Solid Waste Agency v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 191 F.3d 845 (1999): Wood, writing for the panel, held that the decision to regulate isolated waters based on their actual use as a habitat by migratory birds was within Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. The Supreme Court reversed. 531 U.S. 159 (2001).

* National Organization for Women v. Scheidler, 267 F.3d 687 (7th Cir. 2001): Wood, writing for the panel, held that the district court did not err in concluding that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act authorized private plaintiffs to seek injunctive relief. In addition, the court recognized the First Amendment protected the rights of abortion protesters but held that the injunction issued by the district court, which prohibited violent conduct by protesters, struck a proper balance and avoided any risk of curtailing activities protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court reversed. 537 U.S. 393 (2003). Many have misinterpreted the decision as one primarily concerned with the rights of abortion protesters, but Supreme Court commentators clarify, “Wood’s opinion was a judgment primarily about injunctive relief and the breadth of the racketeering statute, not on the right to provide an abortion or to protest.”[11]

* Christian Legal Society v. Walker, 453 F.3d 853 (7th Cir. 2006) (dissent). The panel majority held that the Christian Legal Society (CLS) was entitled to a preliminary injunction preventing Southern Illinois University’s revocation of CLS’s student group status based on the CLS’s failure to adhere to the University’s nondiscrimination policy. In dissent, Wood argued that CLS was not entitled to a preliminary injunction because it failed to show that it was likely to succeed on the merits and failed to demonstrate that it had a fundamental right to the benefits the University believed should have been withheld so long as CLS did not comply with the University’s policy.

* St. John’s United Church of Christ v. City of Chicago, 502 F.3d 616 (7th Cir. 2007): Wood, writing for the majority, held that the O’Hare Modernization Act’s amendment of the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act did not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment because it was a law of general applicability that did not target the plaintiff Church.

* United States v. Warner & Ryan, 498 F.3d 666 (7th Cir. 2007): Wood, writing for the majority, affirmed the convictions on various criminal charges of former Illinois Governor George H. Ryan, Sr., and his associate Lawrence E. Warner.

* Bloch v. Frischholz, 533 F.3d 562 (7th Cir. 2008) (dissent). The panel majority held that a condominium association rule prohibiting objects outside of owners’ doors was facially neutral, and that the Fair Housing Act does not require a religious accommodation for those of Jewish faith wishing to put mezuzot on their doorposts. In dissent, Wood argued plaintiffs had established a claim for intentional religious discrimination under the Fair Housing Act, as there was sufficient evidence in the record to conclude that the rule was being applied in a way that would constitute a constructive eviction of observant Jews.

* Germano v. International Profit Association, 544 F.3d 798 (7th Cir. 2008). Wood, writing for the panel, held that statements transmitted by deaf individuals using a communications assistant in a telecommunications relay service conversation are not hearsay.

[http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Diane_Wood]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dickie Durbin and Bubba Clinton ... not very stellar references.

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.