Posted on 05/10/2002 8:43:18 AM PDT by Michael.SF.
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Court of Appeals has unanimously ruled that President Bush's nominee to a disputed seat on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is the legitimate holder of that seat.
At issue is whether Victoria Wilson, who was appointed by then-President Bill Clinton to complete the term of Judge A. Leon Higginbotham on Jan. 13, 2000, or Peter Kirsanow, who was appointed by President Bush to a new six-year term, was the legitimate holder of the position.
As CNSNews.com previously reported, a Justice Department attorney told the three-judge panel that Congress did not intend to eliminate staggered terms when it rewrote the law authorizing the commission in 1994.
"There is nothing in the legislative history to indicate that they attributed any significance to the rewriting, and there is affirmative evidence that they thought they weren't changing anything," said DOJ lawyer Greg Katsas.
The court agreed, reversing U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler's Feb. 4 opinion in favor of Wilson.
"Congress did not disrupt the staggering of terms of Commission members created in the 1983 Act," Judge David B. Sentelle wrote in the court's unanimous opinion. "Because we agree with appellants that Wilson's term had expired, we reverse the District Court."
"We hold that Wilson was appointed by President Clinton only to fill the unexpired term of Judge Higginbotham, as her commission indicates, and her service as a Commissioner terminated on November 29, 2001," Sentelle continued in the opinion.
"As a result, Kirsanow, having been validly appointed to a vacant seat on the Commission on December 6, 2001, for a term expiring November 29, 2007, and having taken the oath of office, is a member of the United States Commission on Civil Rights," he added.
Kirsanow tells CNSNews.com that he is "pleased, but not surprised."
"Obviously, I'm very happy," he said, "and I'm grateful for the president's confidence and the administration's unqualified support."
Kirsanow says the ruling does not surprise him, in part, because of the "outstanding job" done by Justice Department attorneys presenting the case.
"My attorneys and the Justice Department have been saying from the outset that the law is pretty clear in this matter and that it supports our position," he explained.
Mary Frances Berry in Trouble
Sentelle also noted in the opinion that the actions taken by commission Chairwoman Mary Frances Berry and Vice Chairman Cruz Reynoso to intervene on behalf of Wilson may have been contrary to law, as was claimed by the Justice Department.
"The United States [government] objected that neither the Commission nor its officers in their official capacity have the right to appear in litigation without the permission of the Attorney General, which they had not obtained," he observed.
Sentelle referenced 28 United States Code 516, which states, "Except as otherwise authorized by law, the conduct of litigation in which the United States, an agency, or officer thereof is a party, or is interested, and securing evidence therefore, is reserved to officers of the Department of Justice, under the direction of the Attorney General."
Kessler permitted the intervention in the original case. However, the appeals court did not rule on the issue, Sentelle wrote, because the government did not raise it as part of the appeal.
In fact, the Justice Department acknowledged that the involvement of Berry and Reynoso had, "no practical effect upon the issues presented, since Wilson herself is entitled to defend against the government's complaint."
Calls to the USCCR's office requesting comment on the decision had not been returned prior to the publication of this story.
Another embarrasment to the dems, this time threefold:
mary francis berry - an overwhelming idiot
judge kessler - a liberal activist judge, who is again thwarted in her goals
Dems in general - their continued policy of the advancement of their agenda by court action is also thwarted.
Even though she didn't offer any judicial review to her decision.
The average person of normal morals would be embarrassed, the Democrats won't be. That is one of the infuriating things about dealing with them. They can do the most hypocritical, unethical, obviously, illegal and devious things, and do them with a straight face.
2002 NEWS RELEASES, PRESS ADVISORIES AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS LANDMARK LEGAL RULING PRESERVES INDEPENDENCE OF U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
Commissioner Victoria Wilson retains disputed seat
(Washington, D.C.) Today U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler affirmed the Commission's position that every person seated on the Commission is entitled to serve a full six year term. This ruling ended the attempt by the Bush White House to cut short the term of President Clinton's appointee, Commissioner Victoria Wilson. In granting the Commission a voice as an intervenor in the case, the Court recognized the institution's special role as an independent agency. The Court's ruling is a historic victory. While assuring that Commissioner Victoria Wilson will remain in her seat to serve out her full term, the Court has also preserved the independence and integrity of the Commission. 02/04/02
The foregoing left wing propaganda is "Hosted by the U.S. Government Printing Office." Our tax dollars at work.
Looks like they need to update the ol' website. Anyone who wants to contact the administrator of the Civil Rights Commission website to get them to update it to include yesterday's wonderful opinion can e-mail the webmaster at wwwadmin@usccr.gov.
HUGE bump!!!!
sarge
Dittos. Reminds me of my ex-wife - who voted for Gore while acknowledging the Buddhist temple scam.
We have had about four articles and announcments posted on this but of course the media is ignoring it. I have heard very little mention of it on the news and cable. Oh, well.
I really should have said:
Another ruling, which should be an embarrasment to the dems.
Those who are shameless are by definition incapable of embarrassment.
Her ruling wasn't even an internally consistant delusion. It was just plain dopey. To uphold her position, they'd a had to rewrite it on different grounds.
Infact, it led me to start another thread on Ms. M.F. Berry, based on her letter, from last year, to JEB Bush.
It is posted under "Politcs/Elections". You might want to take a look at it.
Made my day.
Many ex-wives have Democrat traits whether they vote or not. :-)
STATEMENT ON RULING OF THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT REGARDING TERMS ON U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
Dr. Mary Frances Berry, Chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, issued the following statement regarding the Court of Appeals ruling today:
There is a difference in interpretation between the Commission and the District of Columbia Circuit Court regarding the statute governing terms of Commissioners. We are studying the possibility of appealing the Court's ruling.
Despite the ruling against us, the Commission has won on two important points. First, the Commission preserved its independence and successfully exercised its right to have a voice and to be represented in Court. Secondly, we have always maintained that the dispute on the statute would be settled by the Courts, not by this administration or any administration.
05/09/02
The foregoing left wing radical spin continued to be paid for by our tax dollars.
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.