http://ConfirmSotomayor.org

I’ll share on the site various news articles, videos and statements. The site also includes:

* A link to a corresponding Facebook page (http://budurl.com/ftw2).
* The YouTube video created by the Coalition for Constitutional Values.
* Links to various allied organizations.
* A ‘Take Action’ page with four things you can do to ensure an expedient and fair confirmation process and engage others in support of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

If you would like to contribute to the site, please email me at kkamisugi@equaljusticesociety.org.

Comments and feedback are also welcome.

“Associate Justice David Souter has served the Supreme Court and the country well for nearly two decades. He has dedicated his life to public service, to the rule of law and to the Constitution.

“Justice Souter’s retirement is also a reminder of the legacy a president leaves with his appointments. Justice Souter remained on the bench long after the president who appointed him left office. President Obama now has the opportunity to nominate someone worthy of his own historic legacy. The president can look to a broad array of legal talent to select a nominee who not only has an excellent record in the law, but also a respect for core constitutional values and a commitment to equal justice for all, not just a few.”

For more information, or to speak with Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron, contact Kelly Landis at 202-822-6070.

We’re sure you have heard some of the speculation about a potential Supreme Court vacancy this summer. Regardless of what happens in the next couple of months in terms of an opening on the Supreme Court, one thing is for certain: Progressives are not ready for a Supreme Court nomination battle with the Right Wing.

The same Senate Republicans who vilified Democratic filibusters on Bush court nominess are now threatening to obstruct President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees at the Appeals and District court levels, even those widely considered to be moderate-left.

Let’s start to change that. The Californians for Fair and Independent Judges (CFIJ) would like to invite you to a brown bag lunch meeting to discuss reactivating the coalition and preparing proactive strategies for the judicial nomination battles we know are coming.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Noon to 2 p.m. PT (bring your own lunch)
Equal Justice Society
220 Sansome Street, 14th Floor
San Francisco
* a conference call number will available on request

DC staff from Alliance for Justice will provide participants with an overview of the judicial nominations landscape, including what the battle for the next Supreme Court Justice might look like. We will continue the meeting after the briefing to determine next steps for the coalition and what we can be doing to both prepare for a Supreme Court vacancy and for exerting Californians influence on judicial nominations in general.

Please RSVP to rsvp@fairandindependentjudges.org by May 6 and indicate whether you’ll be attending in person or via phone.

The Senate has returned to active work, and on September 9 a Judiciary Committee hearing was held on five district court nominees, who now have a chance of confirmation before the Senate halts business for the year in two weeks:

• Clark Waddoups for the District of Utah
• Michael M. Anello for the Southern District of California
• Mary Stenson Scriven for the Middle District of Florida
• Christine M. Arguello and Philip A. Brimmer for the District of Colorado

The nominations to the Colorado federal court moved forward after a deal was made between the Senators Wayne Allard (R) and Ken Salazar(D). In the meantime, President Bush has nominated two new judges, one to a district court vacancy, and one, Loretta Preska, to a vacancy on the Second Circuit. The nomination of Judge Preska, an archconservative district judge in the Southern District of New York, was presumably made simply to inflate claims that the Senate is not considering pending nominees. In keeping with President Bush?s defiance of Senate traditions and with no consideration for bipartisanship, the nomination was made without consultation with either of New York?s Senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton.

39 judicial nominees pending (9 Ct. App. 30 Dist.)
0 pending on Senate floor (0 Ct. App. 0 Dist.)
8 had hearing but no committee vote (0 Ct. App. 8 Dist.)
22 pending in committee and have not yet had hearing in 110th Congress (9 Ct. App. 21 Dist.)
316 Confirmations overall (2 S. Ct. 61 Ct. App. 251 Dist. 2 Ct. Int’l Trade)
18 Confirmations in 2008 (4 Ct. App. 14 Dist.)
40 Confirmations in 2007 (6 Ct. App. 34 Dist.)
32 Confirmations in 2006 (1 S. Ct. 9 Ct. App. 21 Dist. 1 Ct. Int’l Trade)
58 Confirmations in 110th Congress (10 Ct. App. 48 Dist.)
54 Confirmations in 109th Congress (2 S. Ct. 16 Ct. App. 35 Dist. 1 Ct. Int’l Trade)
112 Confirmations in President Bush?s Second Term (2 S.Ct. 26 Ct. App. 83 Dist. Ct. 1 Ct. Int’l Trade)
204 Confirmations in President Bush?s First Term (35 Ct. App. 168 Dist. 1 Ct. Int’l Trade)
20 Withdrawals (1 S. Ct. 14 Ct. App. 5 Dist.) [1]

[1] This includes Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, circuit court nominees Miguel Estrada, James Payne, Henry Saad, Claude Allen, Charles Pickering, Sr., Carolyn Kuhl, William Steele (Steele and Payne were subsequently nominated and confirmed to district court seats), Michael Wallace, William Haynes, Terrence Boyle, William Myers, E. Duncan Getchell, Gene Pratter, and Steven J. Murphy (subsequently nominated to a district court seat, nomination pending); and district court nominees Mary O. Donohue, Frederick W. Rohlfing, III, Daniel P. Ryan, Jerome Holmes (who was subsequently nominated and confirmed to a seat on the 10th Circuit) and Leslie Southwick (who was nominated and confirmed to a Fifth Circuit seat).

Honaker is a staunch anti-choice activist and someone who has also served for years as a Board member of a right-wing, anti-gay organization. He most certainly does not deserve a lifetime appointment as a powerful federal judge.

We’ve asked you to call Senator Feinstein’s D.C. office. Now please also call her state office nearest you. She and her staff need to keep hearing from constituents that she should vote NO on the Honaker nomination.

Find the state office closest to you here

Richard Honaker has worked vigorously to undermine women’s reproductive freedom. Mr. Honaker has written that abortion is “wrong, and no one should have the right to do what is wrong.” As a Wyoming state legislator, Mr. Honaker in 1991 introduced a bill entitled the “Human Life Protection Act” that would have prohibited abortion, except to protect a woman’s life or in cases of  incest or rape, but then only if the victim had reported the crime within five days of its occurrence — a highly unrealistic requirement in many instances.

He has a disturbing record on government neutrality toward religion and a legal philosophy that threatens church-state separation.  Mr. Honaker believes that the Bible is “true in law,” and has publicly disparaged non-”Judeo-Christians” as unable to sustain “political liberty.”

Mr. Honaker is a longtime board member of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) — an extreme right-wing, anti-gay organization that, despite its name, has taken liberty-restricting positions on a range of matters that have nothing to do with home-schooling. A report in Salon quoted one observer of the Christian right as noting that “HSLDA and similarly motivated organizations . . . are major players behind recent efforts to mandate creationist curriculum and attack environmental education, sex-education, and multicultural classroom material.” And HSLDA has created an “army of eager teen activists . . . called Generation Joshua,” to “help defeat the giants of abortion, same-sex marriage and judicial activism.”

Please call now and urge Senator Feinstein to do everything she can to OPPOSE the confirmation of Richard Honaker in Committee.

You can let us know how the call goes with our online call report form at http://pfaw.kintera.org/CallReport.

Why should you care about a federal judge in another state? As a judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming, Honaker’s bad decisions could be looked to by judges in other states as persuasive precedent, and thus could affect all Americans. Women’s rights advocates in Wyoming as well as leading national women’s rights organizations, including NOW, the National Women’s Law Center and NARAL Pro-Choice America, also oppose Mr. Honaker’s confirmation, as do many other groups, including Americans United For Separation of Church and State and the Alliance for Justice.

For more on Richard Honaker and source material for the statements contained here, please download PFAW’s letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to Mr. Honaker’s confirmation.

As one of only three district court judges in Wyoming, Mr. Honaker would wield considerable power over the people of the state if confirmed. He would also be eligible to sit by designation on the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Mr. Honaker’s work and writings cast doubt upon his ability to set aside his personal beliefs in order to respect established legal principles and the dictates of higher federal courts. His refusal to tender records of his legislative work shows disdain for transparency in government and disrespect for the Senate’s important role in the “advice and consent” process. Because Mr. Honaker has failed to demonstrate that he will respect the legal principles important to all Californians, and indeed, all Americans, we urge you to reject his nomination.

Read the full letter below:

February 20, 2008

Dear Senator Feinstein:

On behalf of the California Coalition for Civil Rights and the millions of Californians who care about justice, civil rights, and a woman’s right to choose, we strongly urge you to reject the nomination of Richard H. Honaker for the District Court for the District of Wyoming.

The California Coalition for Civil Rights (CaCCR) is a statewide alliance of 47 civil rights organizations, made up of activists, educators, lawyers, and advocates who are dedicated to achieving a just and healthy society. Established in 1985, CACCR is one of the oldest civil rights alliances in California.

Our Coalition includes groups that work specifically on issues related to maintaining a fair and independent judiciary, as well as groups that focus on protecting women’s reproductive freedom. Accordingly, we strongly oppose the nomination of Mr. Honaker as District Court Judge. Mr. Honaker has dedicated much of his career to undermining a women’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom and has readily expressed his ambition to overturn Roe v. Wade. Further, his public statements and actions have shown a complete disregard for Supreme Court precedent, as well as a troubling inability to separate his religious beliefs from his duty to respect the rule of law. As the chair of Mr. Honaker’s hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 12, 2008, you gave him an opportunity to explain his record, and he responded by dodging your questions and reciting platitudes. Based on his failure to demonstrate a genuine respect for precedent and a commitment to equal justice under law, we urge you to oppose elevating him a lifetime appointment on the federal bench.

As a Wyoming legislator, Mr. Honaker zealously pushed legislation that flouted the mandates of Roe v. Wade. In 1991, Honaker wrote and was the chief sponsor of the “Human Life Protection Act,” which criminalized abortions even if the health of a woman was at stake-in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court’s holding in Roe. The proposed legislation allowed abortions only if the woman’s life was in danger, or in the event of rape or incest, but then only if the crime had been reported within five days. The bill’s legislative findings, authored by Mr. Honaker, further defied Roe:

· “It is a medical and scientific fact that the life of each individual human being begins at the moment of conception.”

· “This state has a compelling interest in protecting the lives of unborn children throughout pregnancy.”

· “Unborn children are human beings, and abortion is the taking of the life of an unborn child who is a member of the human race.”

Mr. Honaker’s support of this harsh and unconstitutional legislation went far beyond his initial sponsorship. When the Wyoming legislature rejected his extreme views and defeated the bill, Mr. Honaker reintroduced it the next year. When it was rejected yet again by the state legislature, Mr. Honaker joined forces with the Unseen Hands Prayer Circle, whose sole purpose was to place the bill on the ballot as a statewide initiative in 1994. The group, led by Mr. Honaker, was successful in placing the referendum on the ballot, but the initiative was reject by the people of Wyoming, failing to garner even forty percent of the popular vote. Though Mr. Honaker served in the state legislature for several terms, little else is known about his work there, and the state does not maintain substantial legislative records. Though Mr. Honaker may himself maintain copies of this information, the questionnaire he returned to the Senate Judiciary Committee upon his nomination included no documentation of his record as a legislator.

In addition to Mr. Honaker’s extreme anti-choice views, his disturbing philosophy about the role religion should play in American law further calls into question his ability to respect precedent when it conflicts with his own personal opinions. In his published writings on the topic, he has stated:

· “I came to know that if the Bible is true, if Christianity is true, then it is true in family life. It is true in economics. It is true in law, and it is true in all facets of human endeavor.”

· “The secularists have successfully banished Christians from law, politics, and government, and they won’t want to let them back in…. Christians are fair game.”

· “It doesn’t take a legal scholar to perceive that the nation’s highest court, its universities and law schools, its political institutions, and its news media, have moved racially [sic] away from a Christian based toward a secular base in which man, not God, is the creator of values, of rights, of law, and of justice.

· “Autonomy is the new secular religion sanctioned by The United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court no longer talks about America as a Christian nation or about the Christian underpinnings of the law. In moving even beyond the pale of neutrality, it openly advances the idea of autonomy, stating that “personal dignity and autonomy are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

· “The idea of neutrality relied upon the myth that law and government can function without relying upon shared moral premised [sic]. The upshot of neutrality was that some moral premises could be considered in the formulation of law and policy, but that Christian moral premises could not.”

As one of only three district court judges in Wyoming, Mr. Honaker would wield considerable power over the people of the state if confirmed. He would also be eligible to sit by designation on the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Mr. Honaker’s work and writings cast doubt upon his ability to set aside his personal beliefs in order to respect established legal principles and the dictates of higher federal courts. His refusal to tender records of his legislative work shows disdain for transparency in government and disrespect for the Senate’s important role in the “advice and consent” process. Because Mr. Honaker has failed to demonstrate that he will respect the legal principles important to all Californians, and indeed, all Americans, we urge you to reject his nomination.

Sincerely,

/s/ Jamienne S. Studley, Co-Chair
/s/ Malcolm Yeung, Co-Chair

Coalition Members Include:
AIDS Legal Referral Panel
Alliance for Justice
Asian Law Caucus
California Association of Human Relations Organizations
Californians for Justice
Californians for a Fair and Independent Judiciary
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Partnership
California Women’s Agenda
Centro Legal De La Raza
Charles Houston Bar Association
Chinese for Affirmative Action
Coalition for Economic Equity
Community United Against Violence
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
Equal Justice Society
Greenlining Institute
Housing Rights, Inc.
San Francisco Human Rights Commission
Impact Fund
La Raza Centro Legal
Law Center for Families
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
NARAL-Pro Choice California
National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Center for Youth Law
National Health Law Program
National Latina/o Law Student Association
National Lawyers Guild San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
Online Policy Group
Public Advocates, Inc.
Rainbow-PUSH
San Francisco Black Firefighters Inc.
Transgender Law Center

President Bush has nominated Richard Honaker for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge to the District Court in Wyoming. Richard Honaker has worked tirelessly to ban abortion and has publically stated that abortion is “wrong, and no one should have the right to do what is wrong.” Richard Honaker is one of Bush’s most anti-choice nominees to date and shouldn’t receive Senate confirmation.

As a representative in the Wyoming State Legislature, Honaker introduced the “Human Life Protection Act” in 1991. The act would have criminalized abortion from the moment of conception except in the cases of rape, incest, or to protect the woman’s life. Even women who were the victims of rape or incest would have been denied abortions unless they reported the incidents to the authorities within five days. When the act failed to pass, Honaker reintroduced it in 1992 and it was again defeated. In 1994, Honaker served as counsel to the Unseen Hands Prayer Circle, which formed to place the “Human Life Protection Act” on the statewide ballot.

In one year President Bush will be out of the White House. We must ensure that President Bush doesn’t get anymore of his anti-choice zealots on the federal bench. Tell your Senators to reject the nomination of Richard Honaker.

(For more information about the Honaker nomination, please visit the websites of NARAL Pro-Choice America and the Alliance for Justice.)

As a constituent, I am writing to voice my strong opposition to the nomination of Richard Honaker to the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming.

Honaker has spent his career fighting to deny women access to safe, legal reproductive-health services. He publicly and actively opposes abortion, calling it equivalent to murder, and tried three times to ban abortion in Wyoming.

By nominating Richard Honaker to a lifetime judgeship, President Bush has shown yet again that he is totally out of step with the views of mainstream America. Honaker led the push for a ballot measure to ban abortion, which Wyoming voters resoundingly rejected. Now I urge you to do the same with this nomination.

Please refuse to consider this nomination and instead call on President Bush to fill the post with a fair-minded individual who shares America’s mainstream views of constitutional rights, including the constitutional right to choose.

As the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade approaches, so much hangs in the balance. Women’s access to safe, legal reproductive-health choices has been attacked repeatedly by the Bush administration.

Now is the time to stand up to Bush. Please affirm your commitment to the fundamental American values of freedom and privacy by rejecting the nomination of Richard Honaker today.

Dear Chairman Leahy:

Alliance for Justice urges the Senate to reject the nomination of Richard H. Honaker for the District Court for the District of Wyoming. Throughout his career, Honaker has actively worked to undermine a woman’s right to reproductive freedom.  We believe that his zealous advocacy for doing away with such a fundamental right, along with extreme statements he has made about the place of religion in American life, raises serious questions about his fitness for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.

As a representative in the Wyoming State Legislature, Honaker introduced the “Human Life Protection Act” in 1991. The Act would have criminalized abortion from the moment of conception except in the cases of rape, incest, or to protect the woman’s life. Even women who were the victims of rape or incest would have been denied abortions unless they reported the incidents to the authorities within five days. When the Act failed to pass, Honaker reintroduced it in 1992 and it was again defeated. In 1994, Honaker served as counsel to the Unseen Hands Prayer Circle, which formed to place the “Human Life Protection Act” on the statewide ballot.

Honaker’s public statements and written work also raise serious concerns about his ability, if confirmed, to remain objective in cases in which Supreme Court precedent conflicts with his religious beliefs.

In 1992, Honaker wrote a series of two articles for The Reformed Herald about the cultural clash in the United States.  The articles included the following quotes:

·    I came to know that if the Bible is true, if Christianity is true, then it is true in family life. It is true in economics. It is true in law, and it is true in all facets of human endeavor.

·    The idea of neutrality relied upon the myth that law and government can function without relying upon shared moral premised. The upshot of neutrality was that some moral premises could be considered in the formulation of law and policy, but that Christian moral premises could not.

·    Autonomy is the new secular religion sanctioned by The United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court no longer talks about America as a Christian nation or about the Christian underpinnings of the law. In moving even beyond the pale of neutrality, it openly advances the idea of autonomy, stating that “personal dignity and autonomy are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

·    It doesn’t take a legal scholar to perceive that the nation’s highest court, its universities and law schools, its political institutions, and its news media, have moved racially [sic] away from a Christian base toward a secular base in which man, not God, is the creator of values, of rights, of law, and of justice. It is less clear to what degree these institutions reflect changes in views of the American people, changes in the state of the American mind - or to what degree the institutions of led the charge.

·    We are seeing vicious political battles over judicial appointments that would not have occurred had the Court not politicized itself by creating rights rather than construing them.

·    The secularists have successfully banished Christians from law, politics, and government, and they won’t want to let them back in. While it is “politically incorrect” to attack the most reprehensible, immoral conduct, and while it is “politically incorrect” to wish not to pay for obscene art, Christians are fair game.

I urge you to reject Richard Honaker’s nomination in favor of a more moderate nominee with a less troubling record on issues of fundamental importance to all Americans.

Sincerely,

Nan Aron
President

The Senate on Wednesday confirmed Judge Leslie Southwick to the federal appeals court serving Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas despite some Democrats’ complaints that decisions he supported were racially insensitive and inappropriate for a region still shadowed by civil rights struggles.

The 59-38 vote on confirmation was sealed after the nomination survived its main obstacle, a test tally moments earlier. Majority Democrats pressured by labor unions and other constituencies did not have the votes to filibuster, or block, Southwick’s confirmation.

The Congressional Black Caucus warned that there would be consequences for Democrats at the ballot box.

…

Urged by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the AFL-CIO and the Congressional Black Caucus, some Senate Democrats who opposed the nomination made their case nonetheless. They said they didn’t believe he is a bigot, but that the 5th Circuit could not afford a judge who has less than an “exemplary” record on civil rights.

“When it comes to the area of race and racism, we have to bend over backwards,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“I certainly don’t think he’s a racist,” Schumer added. “His words have to be seen in context. Like it or not when he’s nominated to the Fifth Circuit he’s carrying 200 and some odd years…on his back. That is the issue here.”

At issue were two cases he was involved in as a state appeals court judge in Mississippi. One was a 1998 decision that upheld the reinstatement of a social worker who used a racial slur in reference to a co-worker. Three years later, Southwick joined a ruling against a bisexual mother in a custody case. He also joined what some activists said was an anti-gay concurring opinion.

Southwick’s supporters pointed out that those were among 7,000 opinions across the nominee’s career and that none of those facts addressed his qualifications. Conservative legal groups began pressuring Democrats from traditionally Republican states to at least give Southwick an up-or-down vote.

Still, his nomination languished until one Democrat, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, joined with Judiciary Committee Republicans to move the question to the full Senate.