Statement Of Sen. Patrick
Leahy
Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee,
On Judicial Nominations
February 1, 2007
Today the Senate continues to make
significant progress in its consideration of judicial nominations.
The Senate will consider and, I believe, confirm the nominations of
Lawrence Joseph O’Neill for the Eastern District of California,
Valerie L. Baker for the Central District of California, and Gregory
Kent Frizzell for the Northern District of Oklahoma,
When they are confirmed, the Senate
will have granted its consent to 263 of President Bush’s nominations
for lifetime appointments to our federal courts. Moreover, with
these three confirmations today, we will have confirmed more of
President Bush’s nominations in the 18 months I have served as
Judiciary Committee Chairman with a Democratic majority in the
Senate than in the more than two years when Senator Hatch chaired
the Committee with a Republican Senate majority or during the last
Congress with a Republican Senate majority. This is the 105th
confirmation during my time as Judiciary Chairman.
I know some on the other side of the
aisle have tried to raise a scare since I, again, became Chairman of
the Judiciary Committee. They rant as if the sky is falling and we
would not proceed on any judicial nominations. We have proceeded
promptly and efficiently. Last Thursday, the Judiciary Committee
held its first business meeting of the year. We might have met
earlier but for the delay in organizing the Senate from January 4,
when this session first began, until the Republican caucus finally
agreed to the resolutions assigning Members to Senate committees on
January 12.
The three nominations we consider
today were among the five nominations for lifetime appointments as
federal judges that I included on the agenda at our first meeting.
Like the two judges confirmed on Tuesday, Judge O’Neill’s nomination
is for a vacancy that has been designated a judicial emergency by
the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. All five were among
those returned to the President without Senate action at the end of
last year when Republican Senators objected to proceeding with
certain nominees in September and December last year.
Before proceeding, I inquired of each
Member of the Committee whether a hearing was requested on these
nominations this year. I, again, thank all Members of the Judiciary
Committee for working with me to expedite consideration of these
nominations this year. In particular, I extend thanks to our new
Members, the Senators from Maryland and Rhode Island.
These nominations were not even sent
to the Senate until January 9. They were considered by the
Committee in a little over two weeks and are being approved by the
Senate in a little over three weeks from their nomination.
I have worked cooperatively with
Members from both sides of the aisle on our Committee and in the
Senate to move quickly to consider and report judicial nominations
so that we can fill vacancies and improve the administration of
justice in our nation’s federal courts. I appreciate the interests
of Senator Chambliss and Senator Isaakson in the confirmation of
Judge Wood, the first judge confirmed this year. Likewise, I was
pleased to be able to respond to the needs of Senator Inhofe and
Senator Coburn by expediting consideration of Judge Frizzell. I
thank Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer of California for their
efforts on some of these nominations and for working to fill the
vacancies in California.
I have long urged the President to
fill vacancies with consensus nominees. The Administrative Office
of the U.S. Courts list 57 judicial vacancies, 28 of them have been
deemed to be judicial emergencies. So far this Congress, the
President has yet to send us nominees for 17 of those judicial
emergency vacancies.
I have also scheduled a confirmation
hearing for next week for additional judicial nominees and another
business meeting at which the Committee may consider still more
judicial nominations. When a Republican chaired the Committee in
1999 and there was a Democratic President, the first hearing on a
judicial nominee was not held until June 16. We intend to hold a
hearing on February 6.
I had initially thought that we would
include the nomination of Norman Randy Smith of Idaho to the Ninth
Circuit at that hearing next week. However, with the cooperation of
the Senators from California and the Members of the Judiciary
Committee, I now hope to be able to avoid another hearing on the
Smith nomination.
I was pleased when the White House
changed course and nominated Randy Smith for the Idaho seat on the
Ninth Circuit. I had urged President Bush to take this action last
year when he insisted on resubmitting the Smith nomination for a
California seat on the Ninth Circuit. I thank the President for
finally doing the right thing. I will urge the Senate to confirm
his nomination of Randy Smith to the vacant seat on the Ninth
Circuit from Idaho. At long last Senator Craig and Senator Crapo
will then have a judge on that important court from their home
state.
Each of the nominees we consider today
has the support of home state Senators.
Lawrence Joseph O’Neill is nominated
to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California,
another seat deemed to be a judicial emergency by the Administrative
Office of the U.S. Courts. He is a well-qualified nominee who has
over 15 years of experience on the bench, seven of them as a
Magistrate Judge on the district court to which he is now
nominated. Before becoming a Magistrate Judge, Judge O’Neill spent
nine years as a Fresno County Superior Court Judge and, before that,
a decade in private practice. Judge O’Neill will bring a valuable
perspective to the federal bench, having served as a police officer
for five years in the city of City of San Leandro, California. He
graduated from law school at the University of California, Hastings
and then clerked for Judge Robert F. Kane on the California Court of
Appeals.
Valerie L. Baker, who is nominated to
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California,
already has over 20 years of experience on the bench. As a Los
Angeles County Municipal and then Superior Court Judge, she has
handled thousands of cases and has been the recipient of the Alfred
J. McCourtney Trial Judge of the Year Award by Consumer Lawyers of
Los Angeles. After graduating from UCLA Law School, Judge Baker
served as an Assistant United States Attorney and as a commercial
litigator in private practice. Judge Baker was rated unanimously
well qualified by the American Bar Association and has the support
of both her home state Democratic Senators.
As a courtesy to Senator Inhofe, I
included the nomination of Gregory Kent Frizzell on the agenda for
Judiciary Committee’s first executive business meeting last week. I
was glad to see Senator Inhofe say that he was “pleased with the
committee action” and that Judge Frizell was “fast-tracked
through.” Judge Frizzell is nominated to the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Oklahoma. He has a decade of
experience on the bench as an Oklahoma District Judge in Tulsa
County. In his 23 years as a lawyer, Judge Frizzell has served as
General Counsel to the Oklahoma Tax Commission and tried more than
25 cases in private practice as a sole practitioner and an attorney
at Jones, Givens, Gotcher & Bogan, P.C., representing community
colleges, insurance companies, and other businesses. After
graduating from the University of Tulsa and the University of
Michigan Law School, Judge Frizzell served as a law clerk to Judge
Thomas R. Brett on the court to which he has now been nominated.
I congratulate the nominees and their
families on their confirmations today. We continue to make progress
towards filling longstanding judicial vacancies. I intend to do
what I can to ensure that the federal judiciary remains independent
and able to provide justice to all Americans.
# # # # #
