Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Unbeliever · 05-06-2003, 04:36 PM

Do you want to protect the environment?
Are you pro-choice?
Do you want to retain access to the courts?
Would you like to continue participating in policy issues?

Do you live in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands?

If so, you are under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. You may want to look into the career of Judge Carolyn Kuhl, a current nominee for that court, and consider writing to Senator Feinstein, urging her to vote NO on this candidate.

Jet Grind · 05-07-2003, 07:33 AM

Quote:

originally psted by Unbeliever
Do you want to protect the environment?
Are you pro-choice?
Do you want to retain access to the courts?
Would you like to continue participating in policy issues?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and....

Quote:

originally posted by Unbeliever
Do you live in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands?

...No.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Stephen Maturin · 05-07-2003, 08:38 AM

All y'all Ninth Circuit dwellers can read more about Judge Kuhl in this thread. She's got me pining for the good old days when federal court nominees were skittish about lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

On an unrelated note, Deborah Cook's nomination to the Sixth Circuit got confirmed on Monday. She's a classic agenda judge who will vote the party line damn near every time, but we can take some comfort in the knowledge that she likely won't exert any widespread or lasting influence. It's not like the next fifty generations of law students will be studying her opinions or anything. Can't say I'm sorry to see Cook leave the Ohio Supreme Court, but whoever our illustrious governor appoints to take her place will probably be just as bad, sad to say.

Unbeliever · 05-07-2003, 10:22 AM

OK, I just found out that the vote is tomorrow (May 8). Boxer has come out in opposition to Kuhl, but Feinstein has yet to state her position. So we need to call her today, and let her know what we think!

Her phone numbers are:
S.F.=(415)393-0707
L.A.=(310)914-7300
D.C.=(202)224-3841

Toto · 05-08-2003, 02:17 PM

Feinstein seems to have announced her opposition. This means that the Democrats may filibuster.

And that means that whatever state you live in, you can ask your Senator to support the filibuster.

Los Angeles Times editorial against her: Carolyn Kuhl is a smart, capable judge on the Los Angeles Superior Court and that's where she should stay.

Quote:

Kuhl's Superior Court colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, admire and respect her. But as a lawyer in the Reagan Justice Department, Kuhl aggressively pushed positions contrary to this nation's principles and traditions. She tried mightily to persuade the Supreme Court � unsuccessfully � to grant tax-exempt status to Bob Jones University and other racially discriminatory schools, a move that would have reversed long-standing Internal Revenue Service policy. She vigorously pressed the high court to overrule Roe vs. Wade and later, as a private lawyer, she wrote a brief backing the "gag rule" imposed on doctors in federally funded clinics from discussing abortion with patients. As a judge, Kuhl tried to undercut a California law protecting whistle-blowers, a ruling that a state appeals court slammed in unusually strong language.

Kuhl's supporters argue that senators should not see these positions as reflecting her personal views or predicting how she would rule on the federal bench. As a lawyer, they argue, Kuhl was merely acting as a good advocate, enthusiastically pushing her clients' viewpoints. Her backers also note that Kuhl has distanced herself somewhat from these stands. At her confirmation hearing last month, she said "I regret taking the position I did" in the Bob Jones case and demurred when asked about abortion, insisting, "I am not comfortable with giving my opinion." Perhaps her views have moderated over the years. Perhaps, like others who've sat in the Senate Judiciary Committee's hot seat, she was reluctant to tell the senators things some didn't want to hear.

Explaining her role in cases involving sexual harassment, privacy claims and labor relations, Kuhl tried to minimize her involvement or recast her position to tamp down controversy. Yet in nearly every instance, when senators pointed out the discrepancy between her testimony last month and the written record, she recanted. Senators should not reward such disingenuousness with a lifetime federal appointment.

LA Times article: A conservative L.A. Superior Court judge who is in line to sit on the Court of Appeals is latest lightning rod in the federal judicial war.

Quote:

For their part, Democrats are angered that Kuhl's nomination is moving forward.

Under the Judiciary Committee's rules, the president's proposed judges needed a signed "blue slip" signaling the approval of both home-state senators.

In the late 1990s, Republican former Sens. Jesse Helms of North Carolina and Phil Gramm of Texas refused to sign off on President Clinton's nominees to the appeals court in their region. Their refusal killed the nominations.

Two years ago, when Bush nominated Kuhl for the 9th Circuit, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) refused to give her approval. She called Kuhl "anti-choice" and "anti-civil rights."

But when the Republicans retook control of the Senate and the Judiciary Committee this year, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) said he would no longer allow one home-state senator to block action on a Bush nominee.

The Democrats also complained this week about "GOP whining" over judges. They noted that despite the well-publicized filibusters, 121 of Bush's judges have won confirmation in the first two years and three months of his administration.

Stephen Maturin · 05-08-2003, 04:19 PM

As expected, Kuhl skinnied by in the Senate Judiciary Committee on a straight party line vote. Apparently the Democrats still haven't decided whether to filibuster.

GaryP · 05-08-2003, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen Maturin
On an unrelated note, Deborah Cook's nomination to the Sixth Circuit got confirmed Can't say I'm sorry to see Cook leave the Ohio Supreme Court, but whoever our illustrious governor appoints to take her place will probably be just as bad, sad to say.

To steal a phrse, "ditto".

Toto · 05-09-2003, 10:23 AM

A Specter haunts Kuhl

Do you live in Pennsylvania? Maine? Any other state with a half-way reasonable Republican Senator? Call your Senator and urge him or her to vote against Kuhl. If 2 Republicans defect and the Dems hold firm, Kuhl is sunk.

Quote:

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), a moderate and a maverick, said he was troubled by Kuhl's handling of the case of a breast cancer patient whose doctor let a drug company salesman observe her examination.

. . .

"I've got great concerns about this situation," Specter said, recounting Kuhl's decision in the Sanchez-Scott case. "It's the kind of lapse of judgment that gives me great pause. I'm not committed as to how I will vote on the floor."

. . .

Specter's comments created a new uncertainty for Kuhl's final approval. No date has been set for a floor vote, and since Republicans hold a 51-seat majority in the Senate, they cannot afford defections.

. . .

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she decided to oppose Kuhl only after reading her opinions and questioning the judge during and after last month's hearing.

"The question for me was whether a judge with a history of taking extreme activist positions should be granted lifetime tenure," she said.

"She argued for extreme positions and extreme changes in the law on the most divisive of social issues facing the country," Feinstein added, referring to Kuhl's record as a lawyer in the Reagan administration.

While she lauded Kuhl, 50, for having a "very respectable tenure as a Superior Court judge," Feinstein said she was troubled by some of her decisions � and by Kuhl's explanations of them.

"I'm bothered by misleading answers she gave this committee," Feinstein said.

"My office has received a torrent of calls against Judge Kuhl." In all, 21,367 faxes, calls, letters and postcards opposed Kuhl, while 114 letters and phone calls supported her, she added.

Stephen Maturin · 05-18-2003, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GaryP
To steal a phrse, "ditto".

[thread-derailing tirade] Oh, man. I knew Taft was pretty stupid, but he just raised the stupidity bar for all future generations of Ohio Republicans. Terrence O'Donnell?! I mean, he's exactly the kind of OSC justice Taft wants and all (rubber stamp for anything the General Assembly wants to do, ragingly pro-business, etc.), but what an awful choice politically!

O'Donnell was the clown who remained mum while all sitting OSC justices and all the other judicial candidates condemned those insurance industry "Justice for Sale" attack ads against Alice Resnick a few years back. Of course, O'Donnell was running for Resnick's seat at the time and thought the ads would benefit him. Thankfully enough, he was wrong.

If there's any silver lining here, it's that O'Donnell is eminently beatable. It shouldn't be all that tough to drum up some anger over the fact that Taft appointed someone that voters rejected so handily the last time around. That, coupled with the fact O'Donnell was such a big ol' pussy during the attack ads fiasco, should make him quite vulnerable. The Dems still need a viable candidate, though. [/thread-derailing tirade]

05-06-2003, 04:36 PM	#1
Unbeliever Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ca., USA Posts: 283	Action Alert!!! Do you want to protect the environment? Are you pro-choice? Do you want to retain access to the courts? Would you like to continue participating in policy issues? Do you live in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands? If so, you are under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. You may want to look into the career of Judge Carolyn Kuhl, a current nominee for that court, and consider writing to Senator Feinstein, urging her to vote NO on this candidate.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-07-2003, 08:38 AM	#3
Stephen Maturin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Broomfield, Colorado, USA Posts: 1,295	All y'all Ninth Circuit dwellers can read more about Judge Kuhl in this thread. She's got me pining for the good old days when federal court nominees were skittish about lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee. On an unrelated note, Deborah Cook's nomination to the Sixth Circuit got confirmed on Monday. She's a classic agenda judge who will vote the party line damn near every time, but we can take some comfort in the knowledge that she likely won't exert any widespread or lasting influence. It's not like the next fifty generations of law students will be studying her opinions or anything. Can't say I'm sorry to see Cook leave the Ohio Supreme Court, but whoever our illustrious governor appoints to take her place will probably be just as bad, sad to say.

05-07-2003, 10:22 AM	#4
Unbeliever Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ca., USA Posts: 283	OK, I just found out that the vote is tomorrow (May 8). Boxer has come out in opposition to Kuhl, but Feinstein has yet to state her position. So we need to call her today, and let her know what we think! Her phone numbers are: S.F.=(415)393-0707 L.A.=(310)914-7300 D.C.=(202)224-3841

05-08-2003, 04:19 PM	#6
Stephen Maturin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Broomfield, Colorado, USA Posts: 1,295	As expected, Kuhl skinnied by in the Senate Judiciary Committee on a straight party line vote. Apparently the Democrats still haven't decided whether to filibuster.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.