[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 14327-14328]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              LEON HOLMES

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I want to spend a few minutes on what the 
Senate will be addressing over the next several hours. That is the 
consideration of the nomination of Leon Holmes to be a Federal district 
court judge in the Eastern District of Arkansas. His nomination has 
been languishing since January 2003. It is long past time that the 
Senate give Mr. Holmes the up-or-down vote he deserves.
  Mr. Holmes is known in his home State of Arkansas as a brilliant and 
impartial jurist who follows the law. His nomination has brought 
substantial opposition from some liberal activists in Washington. But 
in Arkansas, he has earned respect and support from liberals and 
conservatives alike.
  These supporters include Kent Rubens, who led the fight to strike 
down Arkansas's pro-life laws in the wake of Roe v. Wade. Rubens writes 
in a letter to Chairman Hatch and Senator Leahy on March 21, 2003:

       I cannot think of anyone who is better qualified to serve . 
     . . As someone who has represented the pro-choice view, I ask 
     that you urge your members to support this confirmation.

  Or you can listen to this letter from Ellen Woods Harrison to 
Chairman Hatch and Senator Leahy:

       I am a female attorney in Little Rock, Arkansas. I am a 
     life-long Democrat and am

[[Page 14328]]

     also pro-choice . . . I commend Mr. Holmes to you. He is a 
     brilliant man, a great lawyer and a fine person.

  And the editorial board of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette supports Mr. 
Holmes' nomination. They write:

       What distinguishes Mr. Holmes is the rare blend of 
     qualities he brings to the law--intellect, scholarship, 
     conviction, and detachment . . . He would not only bring 
     distinction to the bench, but a promise of greatness.

  I should also note that Arkansas's Democratic Senators, Mark Pryor 
and Blanche Lincoln, strongly support Leon Holmes.
  In light of this broad support for Mr. Holmes, one wonders if some 
activists in Washington are more interested in a witch hunt than in 
fairness. This body should not erect religious tests for judges. One's 
personal religious beliefs--in Leon Holmes' case, his Catholic 
beliefs--should not disqualify anyone from serving on the bench. I fear 
that the arguments put forth by some of my colleagues may lead to the 
disqualification of judicial nominees who are Catholic or Baptist or 
who hold deeply held religious views.
  Nominees should be judged on their temperament and their ability to 
impartially uphold the law. The Framers of the Constitution wisely 
rejected religious tests for officeholders. I would hate to see this 
body try to upend that wise judgment of our Founders.
  A judge should know how to separate his personal views from those of 
the law, and Leon Holmes' record of impartiality speaks for itself.
  Mr. Holmes finished law school at the top of his class. He was 
inducted into Phi Beta Kappa while a doctoral student at Duke 
University. His doctoral dissertation discusses the political 
philosophies of W.E.B. DuBois and Booker T. Washington, and it analyzes 
the effort Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. made to reconcile their 
divergent views. Mr. Holmes was habeas counsel for death row inmate 
Ricky Ray Rector, a mentally retarded man whose execution then-Governor 
Clinton refused to commute during the 1992 Presidential election.
  Clearly, his record speaks of a man who is compassionate, thoughtful, 
and fairminded. Taken together, I believe Leon Holmes will be a just 
and impartial jurist. He deserves the Senate's support, and I trust 
that my colleagues will join me in voting to confirm him later today.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________