[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 23 (Monday, March 7, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 7, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                PRESIDENT CLINTON'S JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, during his first year in office, 
President Clinton took important steps toward changing the complexion 
of the Federal judiciary. According to a January 11, 1994, article in 
the Los Angeles Times, more than half of the President's judicial 
nominations so far have been women or members of racial or ethnic 
minorities. I applaud the President's commitment to diversifying the 
Federal judiciary.
  From 1789 to 1934 our Federal courts were made up entirely of white 
males. Unfortunately, progress in expanding the membership of the 
Federal courts beyond their traditional composition has continued to 
lag even in recent years. The President's appointment of such 
outstanding and diverse judges can help establish a truly 
representative judicial branch of Government that is better able to 
understand the difficulties of all Americans.
  In 1992, retired Judge A. Leon Higganbotham--the former Chief Judge 
of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit who is known to many 
of us as one of the pioneering African-American jurists on the Federal 
bench--eloquently stated the importance of the appointment of women and 
minorities to the bench when he wrote:

       Pluralism, more often than not, creates a milieu in which 
     the judiciary, the litigants--indeed, our democratic system--
     benefit from the experience of those whose backgrounds 
     reflect the breadth of the American experience.

  I ask that the full Los Angeles Times article, ``Women, Minorities 
Outpace White Men for Judgeships,'' be entered in the Record at this 
point.
  The article follows:

              [From the Los Angeles Times, Jan. 11, 1994]

           Women, Minorities Outpace White Men for Judgeships

                 (By David Savage and Ronald J. Ostrow)

       Washington.--President Clinton literally is changing the 
     look of the federal judiciary.
       During his first year in office, more than half of 
     Clinton's nominees for federal judgeships were women or 
     members of racial and ethnic minorities, a proportion 
     dramatically higher than during any previous Administration.
       For example, Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush named 
     white men to 82% of the available judgeships over their 12 
     years in office.
       By contrast, only 39% of Clinton's first 48 nominees were 
     white men. And Administration officials predict that pattern 
     will continue throughout Clinton's term.
       ``This is the first President who will appoint a majority 
     of his judges who are women or minorities,'' said Ronald 
     Klain, the associate White House counsel in charge of 
     screening candidates for the federal appeals court and the 
     Supreme Court.
       Unlike the elected branches of government, the federal 
     judiciary has been slow to change and remains the province 
     mostly of white men. Among the 837 judges who sit on the 
     federal bench, 5% are black and about 10% are women.
       Among Clinton's first judicial nominees, 23% are black, 35% 
     are women and 6% are Latinos. No Asian-Americans have been 
     nominated
       Besides the changing complexion of the judicial branch. 
     Administration officials point with pride to individuals who 
     have broker barriers.
       Judith W. Rogers, the first black woman to graduate from 
     the Harvard Law School and the well-regarded chief judge of 
     the District of Columbia's highest non-federal court, has 
     been nominated to the influential U.S. Court of Appeals in 
     Washington. Rogers, 54, is only the second black woman ever 
     chosen for a federal appeals court seat and the first since 
     1980, officials said.
       Clinton selected Martha A. Vasquez, 40, as a U.S. district 
     judge in New Mexico. She is the first Mexican-American woman 
     to join the federal judiciary. Justice Department officials 
     said. They also anticipate naming the first Native American 
     judge this year.
       Clinton's sole pick for the Supreme Court. Ruth Bader 
     Ginsburg, is the second woman to serve there and the first 
     Jewish member in the court since 1969.
       THis unprecedented push for diversity on the federal bench 
     has won praise from liberal groups that monitor the 
     judiciary.
       Nan Aron, executive director of the Alliance for Justice, a 
     liberal advocacy group that monitors court nominations, noted 
     that more of Clinton's nominees have worked as public 
     defenders and in providing legal aid to the poor than did the 
     judges appointed by previous presidents.
       The Clinton judges ``will have a greater understanding of 
     the problems confronting ordinary Americans.'' Aron said. She 
     called his appointments ``a welcome change from the wealthy 
     corporate concerns of most of the Reagan-Bush judges.''
       But a conservative analyst decided Clinton for ``catering 
     to the bean counters.'' They are obviously taking the 
     politically correct approach and trying to please the 
     diversity crowd,'' said a legal analyst with Coalitions for 
     America, a conservative group that monitors nominations to 
     the judiciary.
       Among previous presidents, only Jimmy Carter made a 
     significant effort to increase the percentage of women and 
     minorities on the bench. Even so, 66% of his nominees were 
     white men.
       Carter drew criticism for selecting some judges with 
     relatively thin qualifications. Several of his appointees 
     have been accused of moral and ethical violations on the 
     bench.
       But Clinton has won early plaudits for the high caliber of 
     his selections.
       ``They appear to be extraordinary well qualified,'' said 
     Sheldon Goldman of the University of Massachusetts at 
     Amherst, who tracks judicial selections. ``Their ABA ratings 
     so far have been superior to Bush and Reagan [appointees]'' 
     He was referring to the evaluations of each nominee done by a 
     committee of the American Bar Assn.
       We have not seen a tension between excellence and 
     diversity.'' said Assistant Atty. Gen Eleanor D. Acheson, who 
     screens candidates for the district courts. Because of the 
     growing number of women and minorities in the legal 
     profession, ``we have a very rich field to pick from,'' 
     she said.
       During the Reagan and Bush years, critics accused executive 
     branch officials of imposing an ideological ``litmus test'' 
     on potential judges. For example, those who supported 
     abortion rights or affirmative action were vetoed, it was 
     alleged. But Republican officials steadfastly denied the 
     charge and insisted that they sought only talented lawyers 
     who would follow a course of ``judicial restraint.''
       Not surprisingly, Clinton's advisers say that ideology does 
     not figure significantly in their selection process, although 
     they readily note that nominees typically come recommended by 
     Democratic officeholders.
       ``We are seeking people who have intellectual ability and 
     energy, people who are interested in the law and have a good 
     judicial temperament. There are no litmus tests,'' said 
     Acheson, whose grandfather, Dean Acheson, served as secretary 
     of state under President Harry S. Truman.
       The ``no litmus test'' pledge is undergoing something of a 
     test itself, as the Administration considers judicial 
     vacancies in Wyoming and Missouri.
       In those states, both U.S. senators are Republicans. As a 
     result, the Administration received recommendations instead 
     from two Democratic officeholders, Wyoming Gov. Mike Sullivan 
     and House Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.). Both 
     proposed local attorneys known as critics of legal abortion.
       Reacting strongly, abortion rights leaders in Washington 
     protested to the White House, insisting that Clinton not 
     follow in the footsteps of Reagan and Bush by appointing more 
     abortion opponents to the bench.
       The issue has been debated hotly in the White House and 
     Justice Department, but no decision has been announced.
       Because of a slow start, Clinton has yet to put a real dent 
     in Republican dominance of the federal judiciary.
       He came to office facing a record number of judicial 
     vacancies, attributable in part to a prolonged dispute 
     between the Bush White House and the Democrat-dominated 
     Senate Judiciary Committee. Angry that the FBI report 
     involving sexual harassment charges against Supreme Court 
     Justice Clarence Thomas had been leaked to the press. Bush 
     blocked giving the committee further access to FBI reports on 
     its judicial nominees. In response, the committee blocked 
     approval of Bush's court nominees during much of 1992.
       But Clinton's aides were unable to fill the vacancies 
     quickly. Key Justice Department posts went unfilled for 
     months last year. Another complication reflects a selection 
     process that begins with recommendations from Democratic 
     senators, some of whom, such as California Sens. Dianne 
     Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, were newcomers.
       By year's end, however, Clinton had nominated slightly more 
     new judges during his first year than had either Reagan or 
     Bush.
       Nonetheless, a record 118 seats remained vacant as of Jan. 
     1. Reagan and Bush appointees still hold a clear majority in 
     11 of 13 federal appeals courts, according to the Alliance 
     for Justice.
       Clinton has yet to nominate anyone for vacancies in 
     Southern California. There are four seats vacant in Los 
     Angeles and two in San Diego. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of 
     Appeals also has two vacancies.
       The first judicial confirmation fight of the Clinton era is 
     likely to ``come soon.''
       Conservative activists have targeted Florida Supreme Court 
     Chief Justice Rosemay Barkett, a 54-year-old former nun and 
     trial lawyer who has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. 
     Court of Appeals based in Atlanta.
       Jipping and other conservatives accuse her of being soft on 
     crime and an opponent of the death penalty. In several murder 
     cases. Barkett dissented from imposing a death sentence.
       ``She shows a special empathy for convicted murderers,'' he 
     said.
       But Acheson called these charges ``ridiculous'' and 
     ``overblown.'' She cited an analysis showing that Barkett 
     cast votes more than 200 times to uphold death sentences.
       ``They think they have another Rose Bird on their hands 
     don't,'' said another Adiau official, referring to former 
     California Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Bird, who was 
     ousted by voters based on charges that she opposed the death 
     penalty.
       Though Barkett drew fire from conservatives in Florida, she 
     won a statewide vote in 1992 and the endorsement of 
     Republican Sen. Connie Mack of Florida.

                          ____________________