Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy
Senate Judiciary Committee
Judicial Nominations Hearing
July 22, 2003
Today the Committee will hear from seven
judicial nominees, including another nominee to a Court of Appeals.
This hearing is the 14th nominations hearing so far this year,
including 50 of President Bush’s judicial nominees, and the 14th
hearing for a Circuit Court nominee this year.
This stands in sharp contrast to the way
President Clinton’s nominees were treated by the Republican
majority. Fourteen hearings are more hearings for judicial nominees
than Chairman Hatch allowed in any of his six full years as chairman
during the Clinton Administration. In most of those years, there
were far fewer hearings and far fewer nominees. Thus, in the first
seven months of this year, we have already exceeded the number of
hearings held in any of the six years the Republican majority
controlled the pace of the handling of President Clinton’s judicial
nominees.
I recall that, during the entire year of 1996,
when the vacancy rate was higher and rising, the Committee held only
six hearings all year, and those hearings included only five Circuit
Court nominees. During that 1996 session, not a single judge was
confirmed to the Circuit Courts -- not one. In all of 1997, the
Committee only had nine hearings all year and included only nine
Circuit Court nominees. During the entire year of 2000, only eight
judicial nominations hearings were held.
In 1999, the Committee did not meet to consider
a judicial nominee until June 16th, and during the rest
of 1999, it held only seven hearings to consider judicial nominees.
That was the third year of President Clinton’s second term. Like
1999, 2003 is the third year of this President’s term. By contrast,
this year we had already held 11 hearings by the time Chairman Hatch
held his first hearing in 1999.
This year, with a Republican in the White
House, the Senate Republican majority has gone from second gear --
the restrained pace it had said was required for Clinton nominees --
to overdrive for the most controversial of President Bush’s
nominees.
A good way to see how much faster Republicans
are processing judicial nominations for a Republican president is to
compare where we are in July of this year to July of any year during
the last Democratic administration when the Republicans controlled
the Senate. Over the last six and one-half years of Republican
control under President Clinton, the Republicans had held five
judicial nominations hearings, on average, by July 22. By this
date, in 1995, only seven hearings had been held for judicial
nominations; in 1996, only four hearings; in 1997, only four
hearings; in 1998, eight hearings; in 1999, only two hearings; and
in 2000, only seven judicial nominations hearings were held by July
22. Today, we participate in our 14th hearing this
year. The average number of Circuit Court nominees given hearings
by July 22 during the years of Republican control under President
Clinton was five. The Republican majority, thus, is now moving
almost three times faster for President Bush’s Circuit Court
nominees – many of them, highly controversial nominees.
It was not so long ago, when another nominee to
the Eighth Circuit, Bonnie Campbell, did not receive a vote by the
Committee following the hearing on her nomination. Neither the
nominee nor we were ever told why the Republican majority refused to
accord her nomination a Committee vote, despite the support of both
of her home-state Senators, one a Democrat and the other a
Republican. Bonnie Campbell, the former Attorney General of Iowa
and former head of the Violence Against Women Office at the
Department of Justice, saw her nomination die without Senate action
after more than a year. That nomination was eventually withdrawn by
President Bush to make way for the nomination of Judge Melloy, who
was confirmed last year by the Democratic-led Senate. For those
always accusing Senate Democrats of tit-for-tat, the Iowa vacancy on
the Eighth Circuit shows that Democrats have done no such thing.
Indeed, we proceed today on Mr. Colloton’s nomination despite the
still unexplained and shabby treatment of Bonnie Campbell and Mr.
Colloton’s participation in the Republican’s Whitewater
investigation.
Today we will also hear from four nominees to
the U.S. district courts in New York. These four nominees come to
us with bipartisan support, including the support of their two
home-state Senators. Justice Feuerstein, nominated to the Eastern
District of New York, currently serves as a justice in the New York
State Appellate Division and has served as a judge in the New York
State court system for approximately 15 years. Mr. Castel, Mr.
Holwell and Mr. Robinson, nominated to the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York, all have significant litigation
experience as well as commendable records of providing legal
services to disadvantaged persons. The New York nominees were added
to this hearing less than one week ago. The expedited inclusion of
these four district court nominees at today’s hearing is another
example of how the Democratic members of this Committee have
cooperated with the President and with the Committee’s Republican
majority.
We will also hear today from Judge Brent
McKnight, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina. Judge McKnight has served as a U.S.
Magistrate Judge for the Western District of North Carolina for 10
years, received a unanimous “Well-Qualified” rating from the ABA,
and has the support of both of his home-state Senators. Finally, we
will hear from Mr. Proctor, a nominee to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Alabama. These two nominees are to fill
new judgeships that became effective last week.
As I have noted throughout the last three
years, the Senate is able to move expeditiously when we have
consensus nominees. Unfortunately, far too many of this President’s
nominees have records that raise serious concerns about whether they
will be fair judges to all parties on all issues that may come
before them.
#
# # # #
