News
Obama Administration Struggles with Judicial Nominees
Two big fights are happening between the White House and the Senate over judicial nominees. Well, that’s nothing new, of course, but the two fights are pretty interesting.
Want to guess the two sides?
Well, if you guessed Democrats vs. Republicans…you’re wrong. The two sides in opposition are the Obama Administration and some Senate Democrats, although for very different reasons when it comes to the two nominees.
The first nominee is Michael Boggs. If appointed, he would have a lifetime seat on the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. He’s a pretty conservative man–as a Georgia legislator he voted very much to the right on some contentious issues. These include voting to keep the Confederate symbol on the flag of Georgia, make abortion laws stricter, banning gay marriage, and defending discrimination against gay couples.
So why in the world would President Obama nominate Boggs? Well it’s all part of a deal. Georgia, like much of the United States, has long been plagued with a shortage of judges. There are constantly open seats on every level of the judiciary. Anytime one side nominates someone too controversial, they get bogged down and that seat never gets filled. So Obama made a deal with the two Republican Senators from Georgia–Senators Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson. They compromised on seven nominees–four of whom were GOP picks, three are liberal. And the nominees are a package deal, meaning the Senate need to approve all or nothing.
It was a gutsy move on Obama’s part. And it looks like it is really not panning out well at all. They do not appear to have a problem with the other three conservative nominees, but many Democrats say that Boggs is just too much of a compromise.
For example, Human Rights Watch released a statement, saying, “through this clear and unapologetic record Boggs has signaled his hostility towards issues of equality in his home state as an elected official. If confirmed, Boggs’ could entrench these destructive, anti-equality values on the federal bench for generations to come.” The Congressional Black Caucus said they were taken by surprise by the nomination and condemned the nomination. The hearing will be today, and it will be interesting to see if there’s enough opposition for this deal to fall completely apart.
But Michael Boggs isn’t the only judicial nominee that’s causing problems for the White House. Obama nominated David Barron, a Harvard Law School Professor to a seat on the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Unlike with Boggs, the disagreement isn’t over Barron’s politics–he’s actually pretty liberal. Instead the hesitation comes from his work on a particular case, the killing of an American extremist named Anwar al-Awlaki.
Barron worked on the team that put together the legal justification for the killing of al-Awlaki by American forces. Liberal criticism of Barron includes the fact that they do not believe the White House has released enough information on Barron’s views and involvements on the subject. Prominent liberal lobbying group ACLU, as well as both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have demanded the release of supposed memos detailing that involvement.
All of these judicial nominees hang in the balance, which is sad because the deal would make progress in filling seats, and David Barron himself is supremely qualified. And honestly speaking, I think the problems come from a lack of prudence in the White House and a strange and surprising disconnect between Obama and fellow Democrats. He’s not running for election again, obviously, but that doesn’t mean that Obama can afford to piss off too many of his usual allies. They hold the power to make the last few years of his presidency pretty ineffectual. If they deny these nominees, lots of behind-the-scenes work will be thrown out of the window, leaving behind the problem of empty courts and backed up cases. Obama has a couple choices here: asking for permission or for forgiveness. So far he’s been choosing the latter, but at this point, the former may be better advised.
[Msnbc]
—
Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.
Feature image courtesy of [Tim Evanson via Flickr]
Comments