Judge Edward Chen

  • August 13, 2011

    by Jeremy Leaming

    Following his recent critique of senators' failure to move on judicial nominations before they left town, after spending most of the summer wrangling over a largely ridiculous discussion regarding national debt, the Atlantic’s Andrew Cohen takes a closer look at the increasingly troubled Senate process for confirming judges.

    Cohen notes that since President Obama’s inauguration 89 federal judges have been confirmed, 41 with no objection.

    Looking at a group of judges who have garnered some opposition during a final vote, Cohen may not “necessarily” be convinced that the Senate’s obstructionists have a problem with bringing much needed diversity to the federal bench – a large share of the judicial nominees who have seen the longest delays in the confirmation process have been women or minority nominees – but he is disconcerted over a process that includes an increasing amount of politically fueled waste.

    These confirmations additionally “have come at a much slower pace than we saw either with the Clinton Administration or during the era of George W. Bush,” Cohen notes.

    Of the confirmed judges he looks at many were put through lengthy confirmation processes because of past work and/or affiliations – Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), for example, grumbled often over nominees with ACLU affiliations.

    Judges Edward M. Chen and William J. Martinez received a rough going, in part, because of their work for ACLU. “Like Judge Martinez, Edward Chen,” Cohen writes, “evidently was touched with the ‘ACLU gene,’ which rendered him objectionable to Senate Republicans.”

    Judge John J. McConnell’s nomination was held up because “Senate Republicans didn’t like him because the U.S. Chamber of Commerce didn’t like him because, as a lawyer, McConnell had successfully sued Big Tobacco and fought for hose harmed by lead paint.”

    Cohen concludes, in part, that “the high percentage of jurists who ultimately are confirmed with little or no opposition, 77 out of 89 as we have seen, make the Senate look worse, not better. There should be a special place reserved in political hell for any senator, of any party, who votes for a judicial nominee after voting procedurally against that candidate’s ability to get a vote on the merits of her nomination. Such antics are a waste of time, a waste of money, and a waste of the use of precious human resources (the nominees themselves). Right now, the Senate has confirmed 50 fewer Obama appointees than it had for the same period of the presidency of George W. Bush.”

    For analysis and updates of the judicial confirmations process visit JudicialNominations.org.

  • May 10, 2011

    As the U.S. Senate finally confirmed the nomination of Judge Edward Chen to a vacant seat on the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, ACS conducted a teleconference with bloggers about the ongoing crisis of escalating vacancies on the federal bench.

    Chen, a federal magistrate judge since 2001 was nominated to the U.S. District Court seat, which has been declared a judicial emergency by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, more than 21 months ago.

    Chen’s nomination, as noted by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy in a statement, was obstructed by Republicans who opposed his civil rights advocacy work. At a point in his legal career, Chen was a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

    Chen was confirmed today largely along a party-line vote of 56 – 42.

    In Leahy’s statement today, he blasted the opposition to Chen, calling it “ugly.” He continued, “One Republican Senator [on the Senate Judiciary Committee] in explaining his opposition said that Judge Chen has the ‘ACLU gene.’"

    Leahy noted that this should have been “an easy nomination to confirm. It is no surprise that Judge Chen’s nomination received the highest possible rating from the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, unanimously ‘well qualified.’"

    Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid forged an agreement to limit debate on Chen’s nomination, hindering efforts by Republicans to block an up-or-down vote on Chen.

    ACS Executive Director Caroline Fredrickson lauded the action, calling it “a disservice to the nation to keep our federal courts hostage to petty politics.”

    Fredrickson added that for nearly “two years, Republicans have worked to scuttle the nomination of this highly qualified and experienced jurist.” With federal court vacancies on the rise, Fredrickson blasted the delay tactics as “inexcusable.”

    Chen (pictured), as Sen. Leahy noted, will become “only the second Asian Pacific American to serve on the district court bench in the 150-year history of the Northern District of California.”

    In today’s ACS teleconference for bloggers, Fredrickson said there is far too little media coverage of the rancorous situation surrounding judicial nominations, which is leading to an escalating number of vacancies on the federal bench. She cited progress such as the recent confirmation of Rhode Island lawyer John “Jack” McConnell Jr. to the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island.

    But Fredrickson said that this recent movement of the president’s judicial nominations “belies the truth that there has been a systematic delay of judicial nominees by Republicans in the Senate; people have gotten bottled up after having a unanimous vote out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, completely uncontroversial nominees who are held up because people can simply hold them up.”

    She added that this is “a problem that is not getting better, it is getting worse. We anticipate a great number of retirements” of federal court judges over the coming years, which will produce more vacancies.

    The teleconference also included commentary from noted constitutional law professor and ACS Board Chair Geoffrey R. Stone, and Professor and blogger Scott Lemieux.

    Professor Stone examined several consequences of the continued obstruction of judicial nominations, saying one of the most damaging is the politicization of the judicial nominations process.

    Lemieux, a blogger at The American Prospect and Lawyers, Guns & Money, noted that the federal courts have long been skewed to the right due to the many Republic-appointed nominees. Unless the federal courts become more balanced, it means that policies enacted by the Obama administration are in danger of either being invalidated by the federal courts or interpreted in ways that are far afield from congressional intent.

    Listen to audio of the teleconference here. To follow the number of vacancies on the federal bench and status of the judicial nominations, see JudicialNominations.org.

     

  • September 14, 2010

    Five judicial nominees who were sent back to President Obama just before the Senate's August recess have been renominated.

    Judge Robert Chatigny, Judge Edward Chen, former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Louis J. Butler Jr., Rhode Island lawyer John McConnell and Associate Dean and Professor of Law at the University of California Goodwin Liu, all of whom had already been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, will return to that committee for a second vote. The Senate invoked a procedure in August under which the votes of nominees are not held over during the recess.

    "Obama's decision to renominate these figures demonstrates that the White House is not just willing, but eager to spotlight the remarkably slow pace of its judicial confirmations," reports The Huffington Post.

    As these nominees reenter the process from the beginning, their waits are likely to exceed those of some of the most delayed nominations to date, including that of Jane Stranch, who was confirmed Monday after waiting more than a year. Edward Chen was first nominated on August 6, 2009, for a seat vacated in April 2008. Louis Butler Jr. was first nominated Sept. 30, 2009, for a seat vacated January 20, 2009.

    "The administration has been left largely powerless to move Senate Republicans, save for somewhat-idle threats to keep Congress in session while individual nominations are debated," The Huffington Post article reports. "But they are finding more and more allies in their frustration from prominent judicial and political figures."

    The most recent allies, the article points out, are six former federal judges who decried the politicization of judicial nominations in a letter to the Senate majority and minority leaders released by ACS this week.

    "At this moment, our courts are overburdened and increasingly certain vacancies are being designated as ‘emergencies' by the Administrative Office of the Courts because of the length of time the court has been without a judge," the judges wrote. "This situation is untenable for a country that believes in rule of law."

    To follow developments on judicial nominations and vacancies on the federal bench, visit JudicialNominations.org, and become a fan of the site on Facebook.

  • December 1, 2009

    Operating under the spectre of additional filibusters, the Senate considered two of President Barack Obama's judicial nominations today.

    The Senate Judiciary Committee, with only Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Al Franken present, held a hearing on the nomination of Rhode Island Superior Court Justice Rogeriee Thompson to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. "So far, so good," said Whitehouse, who added that the absence of opposition at Thompson's hearing could hamper later attempts to obstruct her nomination. Upon confirmation, Thompson would become the first African-American and only the second woman to serve on the Boston-based appellate court.

    Considering the nomination of Judge Jacqueline Nguyen to the Central District of California in Los Angeles, the full Senate voted 97-0 for confirmation. Judge Nguyen is the first Vietnamese-American ever to serve as an Article III judge.

    Meanwhile, conservative activists are calling on the Senate to block two of Obama's nominees to federal trial courts.

  • November 2, 2009

    Storm clouds appear to be gathering over two of President Obama's judicial nominees facing what Professor Carl Tobias calls an increasingly tight "bottle neck in the Senate." Apparently added to the hit-list for those obstructing nominations are Judge David Hamilton, nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and Magistrate Judge Edward Chen, nominated to the U.S. District Court for Northern California.

    Both Judges Hamilton and Chen are rated as "well qualified" by the non-partisan American Bar Association (ABA), which rates nominations to the federal bench. "Well qualified" is the highest rating provided by the ABA.

    As to Judge Hamilton, Senator Jeff Sessions disagrees with the ABA, having written a letter urging his colleagues to filibuster Hamilton's nomination. Sessions writes that Hamilton's nomination presents "one of the extraordinary circumstances where the President should be informed that his nominee is not qualified."

    Sessions, a failed nominee to the federal bench himself, is currently the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Despite his central role in judicial nominations, filibustering Judge Hamilton's advancement to the Seventh Circuit may prove particularly challenging in light of the support for Hamilton's nomination from his home-state Senator Richard Lugar. That said, Lugar's support has yet to prove dispositive for another of Obama's legal nominees -- Indianan Dawn Johnsen, whose nomination to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel has languished for almost eight months.

    One of the charges being repeatedly lobbed at Hamilton's nomination is that he "ruled that praying to Allah does not violate the Establishment of Religion clause in the First Amendment, but praying in Jesus Christ's name does." This allegation was assessed by one observer last April who wrote, "it's all a lie, but ... I was surprised how despicably rancid a lie it it." The opinion at issue is in Hinrichs v Bosma, and is available here.