[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 102 (Friday, July 20, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7993-S7994]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                   NOMINATION OF JUDGE ROGER GREGORY

  I know that Judge Roger Gregory, his family, and indeed, all of the 
people who live in the area covered by the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit have been waiting a long time for this 
day. Judge Gregory was first nominated for this position in June, 2000 
more than a year ago. He had the bipartisan support of both his home-
state Senators, John Warner and Chuck Robb. Unfortunately, no hearing 
was ever scheduled on President Clinton's nominations of Roger Gregory.
  President Clinton's attempts to fill a number of vacancies on the 
Fourth Circuit met with resistance, delaying the inevitable integration 
of the court. James Beaty, a U.S. District Court Judge for the Middle 
District of North Carolina, was nominated by President Clinton in 
December of 1995, but he never received a hearing. Judge Beaty was 
renominated in 1997, and again, the Committee scheduled no hearing for 
him. Judge Beaty waited a period of 34 months without a hearing.
  President Clinton tried again in 1999, nominating another African-
American, James Wynn. Judge Wynn, a North Carolina Court of Appeals 
Judge, was also denied a hearing before the Committee, but President 
Clinton sent him back to the Senate one more time, at the start of the 
107th Congress in January this year. After pending for a total of 16 
months without a hearing, Judge Wynn's nomination was among those 
withdrawn by President Bush in March of this year.
  Roger Gregory was initially nominated, as I noted, over a year ago. 
Like the others, his nomination languished without a hearing last 
year. Because there was no action taken by the Senate on Mr. Gregory's 
nomination, President Clinton used his powers of recess appointment to 
make Roger Gregory the first African-American Judge to sit on the 
Fourth Circuit and sent his nomination for a permanent position on that 
Court back to the Senate at the beginning of this year. Unfortunately, 
President Bush withdrew Judge Gregory's nomination in March.

  After careful reconsideration, the President sent Judge Gregory's 
name back to us in May, again with the strong support of both Senators 
from Virginia. This makes Judge Gregory one of the few nominees ever to 
be nominated by Presidents of different parties.
  In addition, Judge Gregory is in the unique position of serving by 
means of an appointment whose term would expire at the end of this 
session of the Senate, unless his nomination to a full lifetime 
appointment had been acted upon before we adjourn this year.
  Judge Gregory received his B.A. in 1975 from Virginia State 
University, and his J.D. from the University of Michigan in 1978. Until 
his appointment to the Fourth Circuit, he was in private practice in 
Virginia. Mr. Gregory's law practice was a mix of civil and criminal, 
in both State and federal courts, including criminal defense, personal 
injury, domestic cases, real estate, work as general counsel for an 
urban school district, and defense cases for large insurance companies 
and other corporations such as General Motors and KMart. He was an 
active litigator, trying several cases a year. He also taught as an 
adjunct professor of constitutional law at Virginia State University, 
and as a member of the faculty of the Virginia State Bar Ethics and 
Professional Responsibility course for all recent admittees to the 
State bar.
  Judge Gregory was very active in community and bar activities before 
he took the bench, including service on the Board of Directors of the 
Central Virginia Legal Aid Society, the Richmond Bar Association, and 
the Virginia Association of Defense Attorneys. He had often spoken to 
students and churches. He has the strong endorsements of the National 
Bar Association, the Virginia Association of Defense Attorneys, the 
Maryland Defense Counsel Board of Directors, and many others.
  His life and career have been exemplary and his qualifications for 
this position are stellar. His service on the bench since his 
appointment has been

[[Page S7994]]

uniformly praised. He conducted himself with distinction at his 
confirmation hearing this month. Based on all these considerations, it 
seems appropriate that Judge Gregory's nomination be the first 
considered by the Committee and the Senate this year.
  I commended my good friend, the senior Senator from Virginia, Senator 
Warner, as well as Senator Allen and Representative Bobby Scott when 
they appeared before the Committee earlier this month to urge Judge 
Gregory's confirmation. I do so, again, here on the floor of the 
Senate. The broad, bipartisan support for this nomination has been 
extremely helpful.
  At our hearing Senator Warner was characteristically generous in 
praising Senator Robb and Governor Wilder for their efforts on behalf 
of Roger Gregory, as well. I would also add my praise of two 
Presidents, one a Democrat and one a Republican. President Clinton 
first nominated Judge Gregory and when he appointed him to the bench 
broke a barrier that had extended too long at the Fourth Circuit.
  President Bush deserves credit for renominating Judge Gregory and 
allowing the Senate a third chance to consider and confirm this 
outstanding nominee.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, just prior to the vote on the nomination of 
Roger Gregory, Chairman Leahy made a couple of comments that require a 
response.
  Let me make it clear that I agree with President Bush's judgment that 
Judge Gregory is well qualified to serve as a judge on the Fourth 
Circuit Court of Appeals. I commend Senators Warner and Allen for their 
recommendation of Judge Gregory to President Bush. The controversy over 
his nomination by President Clinton, and his recess appointment in 
December 2000, had nothing to do with his qualifications. Rather, the 
controversy was over President Clinton's decision in late June of 
2000--in the last 6 months of his Presidency--to nominate a Virginia 
resident for a Fourth Circuit seat that has been regarded as belonging 
to North Carolina. In doing so, the President could not have doubted 
that his action would cause a great deal of discord in the Senate--
especially because it was done without consultation with both home-
state senators. I worked very hard to resolve the conflicts created by 
that nomination among the various interested parties. Unfortunately, 
the discord was only amplified by President Clinton's recess 
appointment that occurred after George Bush's election as President.
  In my view, all these facts are now in the past. President Bush, in a 
very significant gesture aimed at changing the tone in Washington, 
focused on Judge Gregory's qualifications and, with the support of 
Senators Warner and Allen, nominated Judge Gregory to a lifetime 
appointment. This was a clear gesture of bipartisanship by President 
Bush which is unprecedented in modern times. In the past 50 years, 
there has never been a case of which I am aware where a new President 
of one party has re-nominated a circuit judge originally nominated by 
the previous President of the other party.
  Chairman Leahy also made some remarks about how quickly he scheduled 
Judge Gregory's confirmation hearing. Indeed, he did so very soon after 
the Senate's organizational resolution was passed on June 29. However, 
this fact does not accurately describe the entirety of the Judiciary 
Committee's record on judicial nominees. Prior to the organizational 
resolution, Chairman Leahy did not hold a single hearing on any of 
President Bush's executive or judicial nominees. He implies that he 
could not have held such hearings without the organizational 
resolution. But that is not true. Between June 5 and June 29, at least 
seven other Senate committees under Democratic chairmen held a total of 
16 confirmation hearings on 44 nominees. One committee--Veterans' 
Affairs--even held a markup on a nomination. Further, the lack of an 
organizational resolution did not stop Chairman Leahy from holding 
hearings on such topics as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, racial 
disparities of capital punishment, and counsel competency requirements 
for death penalty cases. We also had a subcommittee hearing on 
injecting political ideology into the committee's process of reviewing 
judicial nominations. From this record, it appears that the decision 
not to hold hearings on nominees was simply a calculated tactic to 
delay President Bush's nominees.

  The Judiciary Committee's comparative lack of progress continues to 
this day. Since the reorganization was completed, other committees have 
considered nominees at a much faster pace. For example, the Foreign 
Relations Committee on July 10 held a markup on 16 nominees. In 
contrast, the Judiciary Committee has considered only three of the 
pending Bush judicial nominees and only three Department of Justice 
nominees.
  As of this morning, we have 111 vacancies in the Federal district and 
circuit courts, including a number on the Fourth Circuit. I encourage 
Chairman Leahy to start scheduling frequent hearings and markups for 
these nominees. I look forward to working closely with him to review 
and confirm President Bush's nominees in a timely fashion.
  If Chairman Leahy believes that I, as Chairman, did not move Clinton 
nominees and was unfair--which the facts and the record clearly show 
otherwise--then I would hope he would do the right thing and move 
nominees at a faster pace than I did.

                          ____________________