[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 055 (Monday, April 7, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4890-S4892]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE SESSION
______
NOMINATION OF CORMAC J. CARNEY, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will go
into executive session to consider the nomination of Cormac J. Carney,
which the clerk will report.
The bill clerk read the nomination of Cormac J. Carney, of
California, to be United States District Judge for the Central District
of California.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I am pleased today to speak in support of
Judge Cormac Carney, who has been nominated to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California.
Following his graduation from Harvard Law School in 1987, Judge
Carney entered private practice with the high powered law firm of
Latham & Watkins. He worked there until 1991. He next worked as an
associate for another widely respected law firm, O'Melveny & Myers,
where he became a partner in 1995. He remained at O'Melveny until his
appointment to the Orange County Superior Court in 2001, where he has
presided over both criminal and civil matters.
Prior to his appointment to the bench, Judge Carney was an
exceptional business litigator who typically represented Fortune 500
companies as both plaintiffs and defendants. His areas of expertise
included complex matters such as real estate, partnership, lender
liability, environmental law, intellectual property, and insurance
coverage.
Even with a heavy workload and prestigious clients, Judge Carney
devoted numerous hours to pro bono work for the disadvantaged. As a
partner at O'Melveny, he supervised the firm's junior lawyers on pro
bono cases, which included housing issues, education, civil rights, and
the rights of homeless people. Because of the firm's extensive pro bono
work, the Orange County Bar Association awarded it the Pro Bono
Services Award, and the Orange County Public Law Center awarded it the
Law Firm of the Year Award.
Since his appointment to the bench, Judge Carney has become involved
with victims' rights. He currently serves as a member of the Governing
Board of Victim Assistance Programs in Orange County. The Board
provides support and guidance to all victim assistance programs and
advises on procedure and policies relating to operations of victim
centers located throughout Orange County.
Although Judge Carney has had a stellar legal career, I must note
that before he made law his chosen profession he played professional
football, first for the New York Giants and then for the Memphis
Showboats. The legal profession is fortunate that he ultimately joined
our ranks, since he has served on both sides of the bench with
compassion, integrity, intelligence and fairness. I am confident that
he will serve with the same qualities on the Federal district court
bench.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to support the nomination
of Judge Cormac Carney for the Central District of California.
Judge Carney is a bright, young judge with truly impressive
credentials. Judge Carney graduated cum laude from UCLA, where he
earned All-American honors as a wide receiver. He attended Harvard Law
School, worked as a partner for the prestigious law firm of O'Melveny &
Myers, and has served with distinction as a Los Angeles Superior Court
judge.
I am confident he will prove a valuable addition to the bench in the
Southern District of California.
Today's vote on Judge Carney marks a milestone event for California's
bipartisan Judicial Advisory Committee, which Senator Barbara Boxer and
I set up with the White House.
Judge Carney is the eighth judge to come out of the advisory
committee. Nearly every one of these judges has passed out of the
committee by a unanimous vote.
With Judge Carney's confirmation, the committee will have filled all
the current district court vacancies in California.
This if the first time in recent memory that all of California's
authorized district court judgeships are filled.
I would like to give credit to Jerry Parsky and the White House for
working constructively with the California Senate delegation in a
bipartisan manner to get these judgeships filled.
The results of the committee's efforts speak for themselves. On
average, these eight California judges have received Senate
confirmation within 114 days of their nomination.
In contrast, during the last year of the Clinton administration,
district court nominees took an average of 196 days to get confirmed.
We have confirmed these nominees efficiently and without rancor. This
process has enabled the best and the brightest legal minds of our state
to gain admission to the Federal bench.
I hope the Senate sees our efforts in California as a model of how
the judicial nominations process could work.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination
of Cormac J. Carney, of California, to be
[[Page S4891]]
United States District Court Judge for the Central District of
California? The yeas and nays are ordered, and the clerk will call the
roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.
Alexander), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Allen), the Senator from
Missouri (Mr. Bond), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback), the
Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Oregon (Mr.
Smith), and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Talent) are necessarily
absent.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine),
the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), the Senator from Florida
(Mr. Graham), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin), the Senator from
Hawaii (Mr. Inouye), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry), the
Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), the Senator from Connecticut
(Mr. Lieberman), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator
from Georgia (Mr. Miller), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson), the
Senator from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes), and the Senator from New York
(Mr. Schumer) are necessary absent.
I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson)
would each vote ``Aye''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Graham of South Carolina). Are there any
other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 80, nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 126 Ex.]
YEAS--80
Akaka
Allard
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Breaux
Bunning
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Daschle
Dayton
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Fitzgerald
Frist
Graham (SC)
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hollings
Hutchison
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kohl
Kyl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Nickles
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Thomas
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NOT VOTING--20
Alexander
Allen
Bond
Brownback
Corzine
Edwards
Graham (FL)
Harkin
Inhofe
Inouye
Kerry
Landrieu
Lieberman
Mikulski
Miller
Nelson (FL)
Sarbanes
Schumer
Smith
Talent
The nomination was confirmed.
Mr. LEAHY. With today's confirmation vote on the nomination of Judge
Cormac Carney to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California, Senate Democrats again demonstrate their bipartisanship
toward consensus nominees. Judge Carney's confirmation will bring to 16
the number of judicial nominees of President Bush confirmed just this
year, with 14 district court nominees and two circuit court nominees
confirmed in the first 10 weeks since the reorganization of the Senate.
This stands in marked contrast to 1996 when only 17 judicial nominees
of President Clinton were confirmed all year, and not one of them was
for the circuit courts.
Last year alone, in an election year, the Democratic-led Senate
confirmed 72 judicial nominees, more than in any of the prior 6 years
of Republican control. Overall, in the prior 17 months I chaired the
Judiciary Committee, we were able to confirm 100 judges and vastly
reduce the judicial vacancies that Republicans had stored up by
refusing to allow scores of judicial nominees of President Clinton to
be considered. Not once did the Republican-controlled Senate consider
that many of President Clinton's district and circuit court nominees.
We were able to do so despite the White House's refusal to consult with
Democrats on circuit court vacancies and many district court vacancies.
There is no doubt that the judicial nominees of this President are
conservation, many of them quite to the right of the mainstream. Many
of these nominees have been active in conservative political causes or
groups. Democrats moved fairly and expeditiously on as many as we could
consistent with our obligations to evaluate carefully and thoroughly
these nominees to lifetime seats in the Federal courts. Unfortunately,
many of this President's judicial nominees have proven to be quite
controversial and we have had serious concerned about whether they
would be fair judges if confirmed to lifetime positions. We are pleased
that this is not the case with Judge Carney of California.
While Republicans frequently point to the 377 judges confirmed for
President Clinton, what they tellingly leave out is that only 245 of
them were confirmed during the 6\1/2\ years Republicans controlled the
Senate. That amounts to only 38 confirmations per year when the
Republicans last held a majority. In 1999, the Republican majority did
not hold a hearing on any judicial nominee until June. Last week, the
Republican majority held its seventh hearing including a 32nd judicial
nominee in the last 2 months. The Senate Judiciary Committee under
Republican control operates in two very different ways under very
different practices and rules depending on the political party of the
President. This year it is acting like a runaway train, operating at
breakneck speed and breaking longstanding rules and practices of the
committee to rush through the consideration of lifetime appointees.
This year we have had a rocky beginning with a hearing for three
controversial circuit court nominees which caused a great many problems
that might have been avoided had the chairman honored the bipartisan
agreement on controversial nominees and the pace of hearings and votes
that has been in place since 1985, for almost 20 years. The chairman's
insistence on terminating debate on the Cook and Roberts nominations,
in clear violation of the committee's express rules that have been
honored since 1979, for almost 25 years--is another serious problem. Of
course, with the Estrada nomination, the administration's unwillingness
to work with the Senate to provide access to documents of the exact
same type as have been provided in past nominations for lifetime and
short-term appointments has proven to be a significant problem. The
opposition to the Sutton nomination is also extensive. The
unprecedented nature of a President re-nominating someone for the same
judicial position after a defeat in committee has led to the very
controversial Owen nomination pending on the floor with the assent of
only the Republicans on the committee. The chairman's decision to hold
a hearing on the controversial Judge Kuhl, despite objections of one of
her home state Senators, is also problematic and is something that he
never did, not once, when there was a Democrat in the White House.
Nonetheless, the Senate has proceeded to confirm 116 of President
Bush's judicial nominees, including 16 this year alone and another
today. It was not until September 1999, 9 months into the year, that 16
of President Clinton's judicial nominees were confirmed in the first
session of the last Congress in which Republicans controlled the Senate
majority. At the pace set by Republicans now, we are 6 months ahead of
that schedule.
The confirmation of Judge Carney will fill the last current vacancy
in the Federal district courts in California. This nomination is a good
example of the kind of bipartisan-supported candidates the President
ought to be sending the Senate. Judge Carney comes to us after being
unanimously approved by California's Bipartisan Judicial Advisory
Committee--a committee established through an agreement Senator
Feinstein and Senator Boxer reached with the White House. This is one
of the few bipartisan commissions that the White House has allowed to
proceed, although the White House has not moved forward with some of
its bipartisan, qualified recommendations. This California committee
works to take the politics out of judicial nominations. It reviews
qualified, consensus nominees who will serve on the Federal judiciary
with distinction. Too often in the last 2 years we have seen the
recommendations of such bipartisan panels rejected or stalled at the
White House. Instead, they should be honored and encouraged.
Judge Carney has served as a Superior Court Judge in the State of
California since 2001. Judge Carney was a
[[Page S4892]]
partner with the law firm of O'Melveny & Myers handling civil matters
before he was appointed to the State court bench in 2001. He played
professional football before going to law school and has served in the
Air Force Reserve.
Two other district judges in California have already been unanimously
confirmed this year, Judge Selna and Judge Otero. Last Congress, led by
a Democratic Senate majority, the Senate confirmed four nominees to the
Federal district courts in California. Percy Anderson and John Walter
were confirmed to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California on April 25, 2002, just 3 months after their initial
nominations. The Senate also confirmed Robert G. Klausner to be a U.S.
District Judge for the Central District of California on July 18, 2002,
and Jeffrey S. White to be a U.S. District Court Judge for the Northern
District of California on November 14, 2002. The Senate has now filled
all seven of the vacancies on the Federal trial courts in California
that we inherited.
Last year, at the urging of Senator Feinstein and the chief judge of
the district, we included in the 21st Century Department of Justice
Appropriations Authorization Act, five additional judgeships for the
Southern District of California. We also included an additional
position for the Central District of California. By mid-July California
will have six important vacancies to be filled. I look forward to
working with the Senators from California to proceed, if possible, in
advance of July on additional nominations so that these much-needed
seats can be filled quickly with fair, mainstream nominees. It is
unfortunate that the President, who has had notice of these upcoming
vacancies for some time, has not worked with the California Senators
and their bipartisan commissions to send consensus nominees to the
Senate.
I congratulate Judge Carney, his family, and the Senators from
California on his confirmation.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I want to express my
support for the nomination of Cormac J. Carney to be U.S. District
Judge, for the Central District of California. Mr. Carney has the
knowledge, experience and personal characteristics needed to succeed on
the Federal bench.
Unfortunately, due to inclement weather, I was unable to return to
Washington in time for the vote to confirm Mr. Carney, but I would like
the Record to reflect that, had I been present, I would have cast my
vote in favor of his confirmation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The President will be immediately notified of
this action.
____________________