Confirmation Battle Begins for Tainted Judicial Nominees

By Linda Berg, NOW Political Director

March 4, 2005

Thumbing his nose at Senate Democrats who had already found them too extreme for a lifetime appointment, George W. Bush last month re-nominated a dozen judges for elevation to some of the highest courts in the nation. Republicans wasted no time in launching their battle for those nominees' confirmation even though it is clear that this "in your face" tactic may lead to a total breakdown in the workings of the Senate.

In the first three nominees selected for a hearing by Judiciary Committee Chair Arlen Specter, the administration reveals its hand and makes clear the issues through which it hopes to mold the federal judiciary. The records of these three nominees demonstrate a breathtaking hostility to women's rights, civil rights, worker's right, environmental protection and the notion of an impartial judiciary.

The opening salvo was the March 1, 2005 hearing for the confirmation of William G Myers for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. In the hearing, Senator Patrick Leahy stated, "I believe Mr. Myers to be the most anti-environment nominee sent to the Senate in my time here." Myers has criticized the Supreme Court on both Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut (legalizing birth control), saying that those decisions were made on the "personal moral values of the justices." He likewise praised the decision in Bowers v. Hardwick, which permitted the use of state criminal sodomy laws against gay and lesbian couples. Myers has compared federal laws protecting the environment to the "tyranny" of King George. Formerly an attorney for grazing and mining corporations, as the Interior Department's top lawyer, Myers issued decisions that would devastate sacred tribal lands and his nomination has engendered unprecedented opposition from Native American Indian Tribes. NOW joined 172 other organizations in opposing this nomination .

On March 3, the Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on the nomination of Terrence Boyle to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. This former aide to Jesse Helms holds an honorary degree from Bob Jones University, and he was one of the first judges to rule that the Americans with Disability Act did not apply to the States. Twice reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court when he sided with white plaintiff voters in redistricting cases, Boyle has said that states are not obligated to adhere to equal opportunity law in positions where a state's "culture" does not approve of women working in that field. Because, as a sitting District Court judge, Boyle has only published a handful of his more than 10,000 opinions, we believe that the hostility to our rights obvious in that handful of cases is probably the tip of the iceberg. Because of the danger posed by this nomination, NOW President Kim Gandy sent a strong letter of opposition to Boyle's confirmation directly to Senators Leahy and Specter.

Next week, the Committee plans to hold a hearing on the nomination of Thomas B. Griffith to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, notwithstanding the fact that he admits to practicing law without a license for three years. This nominee poses particular risk to the rights of women. As a member of the misleadingly-named Commission on Opportunity in Athletics, he proposed a series of changes to Title IX (the equal educational opportunity law) which, if implemented, would have had devastating effects on equality for women in school athletics. Griffith has compared his political philosophy to that of ultra-conservative Senator Rick Santorum, who is notorious for his rabid attacks on reproductive rights and whose philosophy is not one we wish federal judges to emulate.

A U.S. Court of Appeal is often the court of last resort for the preservation of our rights, as the Supreme Court takes only a few thousand cases each year. NOW is determined to fight each and every right-wing ideologue nominated by this president. It is unclear which judicial nomination will be heard by the Judiciary Committee next and how our enemies in Congress will react to the determination of our Congressional allies to stand up to this court-packing scheme. Stay tuned, as this parade of horrible judges unfolds.