Skip to comments.The Most (Un)Wanted Judges (Obama’s radical judicial nominees)
Posted on 05/17/2011 10:16:45 AM PDT by jazusamo
A comprehensive rundown of the worst of the worst of Obamas radical judicial nominees.
The FBIs Most Wanted Fugitives list has been around since 1950. President Obamas penchant for nominating political activists and radical academics to the federal judiciary has resulted in a new list: the Most (Un)Wanted Judges. This list is comprised of nominees who (with two exceptions) are now pending a vote in the Senate.
The federal judiciary is not the place for political agendas and academic fads. But the Left has used the federal courts for decades to advance their political goals at the expense of the Constitution and the rule of law. The worst of the worst judicial nominees would, if confirmed, set back our liberty, our economic freedom, and the hard work that constitutionalists have been doing to reestablish the limits on the power of government envisioned by the Framers.
Here is the whos who of the worst:
Goodwin Liu: If you think the Ninth Circuit, the most liberal and out-of-control appeals court in the country, couldnt get any worse, you havent met Goodwin Liu, associate dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law.
For starters, Liu does not even meet the standard for federal judgeships outlined by the American Bar Association, which requires substantial courtroom and trial experience and at least 12 years practicing law. Liu has no experience as a trial lawyer. He hadnt even been out of law school for 12 years when he was nominated.
In his writings, Liu has shown a disturbing judicial philosophy that fits neatly within the activist mold Obama wants nominees to fill. Liu envisions the judiciary as a culturally situated interpreter of social meaning. Judges are not supposed to be interpreters of social meaning who base their decisions on the latest cultural meanderings of academia. They are supposed to be interpreters of the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress. But it is this kind of nebulous culturally situated interpretation that allows judges to ignore the plain and ordinary meaning of the law and to replace it with what they personally think is the best outcome based upon their own highly subjective, biased, and often radical interpretation of social meaning.
Just how would this interpretation of social meaning manifest itself? One way, according to Liu, would be a court-created constitutional right to welfare. Liu desires a reinvigorated public dialogue about our commitments to mutual aid and distributive justice across a broad range of social goods. He wants the courts to recognize a fundamental right to education or housing or medical care as an interpretation and consolidation of the values we have gradually internalized as a society.
In another article, Liu stated that negative rights against government oppression and positive rights to government assistance have equal constitutional status because both are essential to liberty. This concept is foreign to our Constitution: our Framers recognized the danger of inviting the government to assist us with distributing social goods.
Lius opposition to the death penalty prompted 42 of Californias 58 county prosecutors to send a letter to the Senate protesting his nomination because he would vote to reverse nearly every death sentence. In fact, the prosecutors said that Lius views on criminal law, capital punishment, and the role of the federal courts in second-guessing state decisions are fully aligned with the judges who have made the Ninth Circuit the extreme outlier that it presently is.
Liu also believes that Americans have an obligation to make reparations for slavery and supports racial quotas to remedy societal discrimination, a position the Supreme Court has rejected.
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
The GOP shouls atop all these judicial nominees dead in their tracks and keep on doing it right up to the election.
As a member of the Gang of 14 in 2005, I agreed that Nominees should be filibustered only under extraordinary circumstances, McCain said before the vote. The nomination of Mr. McConnell does not rise to a level of extraordinary circumstances.
I consider that statement by McCain to be an outright lie.
McConnell was an "extraordinary circumstance" just as these other seven radical nominees should be for a Senate filibuster.
The Federal Judiciary is completely out of control and in the Obama tank.
See Judge Land - Middle district of Georgia and Judge Lazzara - Middle District of Florida.
The Senate has become nothing more than a rubber stamp when it comes to confirming leftist, radical, activist judges.
“Liu does not even meet the standard for federal judgeships outlined by the American Bar Association ...”
This is good to remember. Whenever leftist ABA hates a conservative judge, the rats scream bloody murder. This would be a sweet reminder to keep on file.
look at Holder & Fast and Furious !
the rejection rate is more than three and a half times as high as it was under either of the previous two presidencies.............
The American Bar Association has secretly declared a significant number of President Obamas potential judicial nominees not qualified, slowing White House efforts to fill vacant judgeships and nearly all of the prospects given poor ratings were women or members of a minority group, according to interviews.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.