Posted on 11/30/2017 1:42:21 AM PST by Impy
WASHINGTON — Louisiana U.S. Sen. John Kennedy lambasted several of the Trump administration's picks for the federal judiciary, calling one nominee "embarrassing" and questioning the competency of the White House office charged with vetting potential judges.
Kennedy became the first GOP senator to vote against a Trump administration nominee for a federal judgeship Tuesday night, turning down his thumb at Gregory Katsas' nomination for the powerful D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The senator said Katsas, an attorney who currently serves as deputy counsel to President Donald Trump, would have an inherent conflict of interest on the appeals court because of its extensive jurisdiction over matters involving the White House.
The Senate confirmed Katsas to the post, 50 to 48, despite Kennedy's vote. Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia broke ranks with his party to back Katsas.
"I think his credentials are extraordinary, I think he does an extraordinary job for President Trump," Kennedy said of Katsas, "But to me there’s an appearance of a conflict if on one day he’s representing the president and the next day he’s on the D.C. Circuit deciding cases in which the president is a party."
Kennedy, speaking with a gaggle of reporters in the basement of the U.S. Capitol just after casting his vote against Katsas, pledged to oppose another White House pick for a federal judgeship in Alabama.
The senator also hinted at potential opposition to Kyle Duncan, a nominee for a Louisiana seat on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Duncan is set to appear before the Senate's Judiciary Committee Wednesday.
Kennedy said he's impressed with the "pro-life and pro-religious freedom" qualifications of Duncan, a 45-year-old LSU law school graduate who has become a major Washington-based legal warrior on conservative social issues.
But Kennedy questioned Duncan's ties to the state, saying he's received "a lot of calls" from Louisiana attorneys and judges with extensive experience and comparable conservative credentials. Appointments to the federal bench are highly prized among lawyers and seats on appellate courts like the Fifth Circuit are lifelong ambitions for many.
Except for a several-year stint working for former Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, Duncan has spent nearly all of his professional career outside Louisiana and has been based in Washington for the past several years.
"'So how come you’re picking a Washington lawyer — what am I, chopped liver?'" Kennedy said Louisianans have asked him. "And I’ve got to be able to answer that from those people."
Although Kennedy told Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, he has no objections to holding a hearing for Duncan, the Louisiana senator has so far withheld his support.
Kennedy highlighted Brett Talley, a White House pick for a lifetime federal district court appointment in Alabama, as an example of White House nominees "that have no business being on a federal bench."
Numerous questions have been raised about Talley's qualifications. Talley, an attorney, has never tried a courtroom case. He also didn't note that his wife, Annie Donaldson, works in the White House as chief of staff to White House Counsel Don McGahn.
Kennedy said he'd vote against Talley "in a heartbeat — and twice if I could."
Kennedy said he supported Talley in the Judiciary Committee only because he was never told about his wife's position and because other disqualifying information hadn't come to light. Kennedy referenced a Slate.com report indicating Talley may have defended the Klu Klux Klan in voluminous posts to an online message board.
"Give me a break!" Kennedy said. "It is embarrassing and I think the president of the United States is getting some very, very bad advice."
Kennedy said he'd tried to raise these concerns with McGahn, the White House counsel, whose office handles potential nominees for the federal bench. But the senator said those conversations haven't been productive.
"It's like talking to the wind," Kennedy said.
He earned his Bachelor of Arts from Princeton University and his Juris Doctor from Harvard Law School [ok, a conservative from the Ivy Leagues???? It does happen, but that isn't Kennedy's complaint], where he was an executive editor of the Harvard Law Review. Early in his career, he served as a law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas, both at the District of Columbia Circuit and the United States Supreme Court, and to Judge Edward Roy Becker of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. From 2001 to 2009, he served in many senior positions in the United States Department of Justice, including Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division and Acting Associate Attorney General. Prior to joining the White House Counsel’s Office, he was a partner at Jones Day, where he specialized in civil and appellate litigation. He has argued more than 75 appeals, including cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and every federal appellate court.
So he wants to sell his vote to a local. Sleazebag. RECALL!
This is his way of getting close to Senators Susan Collins and that two bit zanah from Alaska.
I don’t know if you’re aware but even if a state has recall laws (LA does apparently), they can’t be applied to members of Congress. That would take a constitutional amendment.
They have yet to vote against a Trump judge but he has! Now that’s embarrassing.
This kennedy bum needs to resign within the next hour. What a cuck and putz. I guess his transformation into a repub hasn’t been completed as yet. He is a traitor to his electorate.
Note to the stupid senator.
As judge Mr Katsas will have opportunities in which he may recuse himself from any case that directly relates to any matters he was a party to in his work at the White House.
I think even the Liberal judge Kagan, appointed by Oabama, did that on some matter she had been party to when she worked in Obama’s administration.
Does the Constitution or law demand a judge recuse themselves if there might be a conflict of interest? No. Neither the founders nor any majority opinion since tried to add to the Constitution terms that define exactly when a judge MUST recuse themselves.
Are there many matters that come before the D.C. circuit court that don’t have anything to do with actions taken by the current White House or it’s administration? Yes. And Katsas will still be there after Trump leaves office. Good for Trump and his leaving a legacy in the judiciary. You get THAT Senator Kennedy????
I opposed him in the primary for that reason, and it fell on deaf ears here.
Until recently he was funded by MoveOn.org? So what? He put an "R" next to his name now, so it's okay.
Sounds right
Well, I agree with Fieldmarshaldj that Kennedy's objections are legit (picking some DC insider to "represent" Louisiana on the federal bench instead of picking a local guy who has paid his dues and actually lives there), and IMO the White House shouldn't have ignored him. The Constitution says ADVICE and consent from the Senate for a reason. It doesn't say "The President knows best for whats all the states and the Senators from those states should shut up and get in line"
To me, its a whole different ballgame than say, John Thune going rogue and vowing to oppose nominees because of an totally unrelated issue relating to federal bacon for SD.
That being said, while the White House SHOULD have listened to Kennedy, Kennedy's objections aren't enough to justify voting against the nominee on the final floor vote. IMO, the only valid reason to vote down a Trump nominee is they are either not qualified for the job or there's a good possibility they are a stealth liberal. Every Trump nominee I'VE opposed has been on those grounds (::cough:: Tillerson ::cough:: ) He can't just leave any seat vacant because the choice is less than ideal and not who he would have picked.
And I never trusted "Republican" Kennedy and I still don't. Sort of like "Republican" Walter Jones in North Carolina. Two guys who only switched parties not because of sincere ideological reasons, but because of political necessity to advance their careers. Too many FReepers were ready to blindly "get behind" Kennedy the moment he put an "R" next to his name, simply because he was a candidate with "name ID". Tsk, tsk.
Well, I agree with Fieldmarshaldj that Kennedy's objections are legit (picking some DC insider to "represent" Louisiana on the federal bench instead of picking a local guy who has paid his dues and actually lives there), and IMO the White House shouldn't have ignored him. The Constitution says ADVICE and consent from the Senate for a reason. It doesn't say "The President knows whats best for all the states and the Senators from those states should shut up and get in line"
To me, its a whole different ballgame than say, John Thune going rogue and vowing to oppose nominees because of an totally unrelated issue relating to federal bacon for SD.
That being said, while the White House SHOULD have listened to Kennedy, Kennedy's objections aren't enough to justify voting against the nominee on the final floor vote. IMO, the only valid reason to vote down a Trump nominee is they are either not qualified for the job or there's a good possibility they are a stealth liberal. Every Trump nominee I'VE opposed has been on those grounds (::cough:: Tillerson ::cough:: ) He can't just leave any seat vacant because the choice is less than ideal and not who he would have picked.
And I never trusted "Republican" Kennedy and I still don't. Sort of like "Republican" Walter Jones in North Carolina. Two guys who only switched parties not because of sincere ideological reasons, but because of political necessity to advance their careers. Too many FReepers were ready to blindly "get behind" Kennedy the moment he put an "R" next to his name, simply because he was a candidate with "name ID". Tsk, tsk.
I voted for Rep. John Fleming in the open primary, but being from the northern part of the state was no big help to him, plus Kennedy had substantial name recognition from his long tenure as state treasurer (and he also ran against Landrieu in 2008 and lost by about 5 points...if he’d have beaten her the Dems wouldn’t have gotten their filibuster proof majority in the Senate even with the Franken theft and the Specter switch)
My biggest fear was RINO Charles Boustany winning the seat. I suppose it could have been worse.
My biggest fear was a Campbell/Fayard runoff. Stinking jungle primary has got to go!!
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.