BUSH TO NOMINATE ANTI-ADA LAWYER FOR APPEALS COURT!

See the attached article on Bush's upcoming judicial nominations.  He is
going for hard-right nominees of the most extreme sort.  Top of the list is
Jeffrey Sutton, currently a partner at Day Jones, but at a young age already
having a track record of having filed a series of briefs that have
collectively negated more civil rights than any other lawyer out there.

My god, this guy is a scary guy who has been on the forefront of
constitutional assaults on discrimination laws, striking down federal
legislation in the name of "states rights", defending corporate abuse of the
legal system, denying prisoners appeal rights, and expanding the drug war.

To give you a summary

Jeffery Sutton has..
* Filed the Garrett brief on behalf of the state of Alabama in the recent
case that struck down ADA suits against state governments
*  Defended Wal-Mart's withholding of evidence in discovery, for which
Wal-Mart was sanctioned by courts
* Filed brief on behalf of state of Alabama to help invalidate the Violence
Against Women Act
* Represented Wal-Mart in seeking to bar independent contractors from being
protected against racial discrimination
* Represented the Florida Board of Regents in Kimel case that barred
economic recovery against states in age discrimination cases, a precursor to
the Garrett decision
* Represented a coalition of states in the City of Boerne v. Flores case
which struck down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in the name of
states rights
* Argued to restrict prisoner's rights to appeal under the Anti-terrorism
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 before the Supreme Court in the 1998
Hohn v. United States case.
* Vigorously supported the drug war, including the suspension in Ohio of
driver licenses for drug possession, even when no car was involved in
arrest. State v. Thompkins, 1996 WL 276144 (Ohio June 5, 1996)

This does not include the array of corporate cases I am sure we could find
in his role as a partner at Jones Day.   This guy is particularly dangerous.
He is apparently the lawyer who has singlehandedly been most responsible for
the whole string of cases from Flores through Kimel to Garrett in building
the doctrines of state government immunity from discrimination lawsuits.
Add to his defense of corporations against discrimination suits in the
private sector and you have an example of an almost unmitigatingly rightwing
guy.

We need to be mobilizing to defeat and filibuster this nomination right
away.  Start calling your Senator NOW!

Nathan Newman

--

Bush to nominate conservative judges
http://www.icanonline.net/news/fullpage.cfm?articleid=C1E4121E-C8EA-
42D2-A4F
96C272413F9C8&cx=news.news
By Joan Biskupic
USA TODAY
March 23, 2001

WASHINGTON -- As a candidate, George W. Bush declared he wanted to
makefederal courts more conservative. Now, President Bush is poised to
deliver.

Within a few weeks, Bush will make his first nominations to federal
courts. Among those high on the list for influential appeals courts are
conservatives such as Michael McConnell, a University of Utah law
professor who has an expertise in church-state disputes; and Jeffrey Sutton,
a Columbus, Ohio, lawyer who has successfully argued states' rights
cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Bush's nominee for U.S. solicitor general, the government's top
lawyer before the Supreme Court, is Theodore Olson. He is best known for
winning the Florida election case Bush vs. Gore at the high court. He also
is one of the architects of contemporary legal conservatism. He argued
successfully against the University of Texas' affirmative action
program five years ago, persuading an appeals court to strike down the
policy favoring minority applicants.

The president's choices, combined with Thursday's bold step of
eliminating the American Bar Association's historic role of screening
prospective nominees, send the message that the White House wants to tightly
control the selection of judges and to curb potential influence from the
left.

Halting the ABA's five decades of screening judicial nominees for
competence and the moves to bring on board the most prominent
thinkers of the conservative legal community indicate the Bush
administration's
resolve to reshape the nation's courts.

"The message seems to be a right-wing takeover," says Sheldon
Goldman, a University of Massachusetts-Amherst political science professor
who has tracked judicial nominations since the 1960s. Goldman criticized
Bush's move to get rid of the ABA reviews.

The administration appears quite determined to change the bench, an
approach that contrasts with the Clinton administration's slower,
measured method of choosing judges. Bush's tactics recall the vigor of
Ronald
Reagan's push to put a conservative stamp on the federal judiciary.

White House counsel Alberto Gonzales said recently that the
administration wants judges who do not "use the bench to further an agenda."

"I do think judges are asked to do too much in society," says
Gonzales, who was a Texas Supreme Court justice, appointed by then-Gov.
Bush. Gonzales says courts have been excessively involved in prisoners'
rights
cases and school integration disputes.

That view contrasts with the more liberal notion that judges often
must intervene to safeguard the rights of people, particularly the poor
and disenfranchised, whose interests often are not represented by
majority votes in legislatures.

The administration is finalizing its first slate of nominees. About a
dozen names for the appeals courts are likely to be sent soon to the
Senate, which has confirmation authority.
People close to the nomination process say some leading candidates
are McConnell for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, which
covers six Western states; Sutton for the 6th Circuit, which is based in
Cincinnati and covers four states; and Washington, D.C., lawyer John
Roberts (a former clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist) for the
appeals court here that mostly handles disputes over federal regulations.

To see more of USAToday.com, or to subscribe, go to www.usatoday.com.
©
Copyright 2001 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.




Reply via email to