Goodwin Liu - Obama's nominee for spot on the Ninth Circuit

General General Discussion
1

Goodwin Liu is anti-2nd Amendment and a direct threat to our Constitutional freedoms, he’s also chaired by Dianne Feinstein. Let’s discuss his nomination to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals here.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/obama-pushing-anti-gun-radical-goodwin-liu-as-federal-judge

“Liu believes that judges have the authority to impose their views… using clever verbal camouflage to disguise what they’re doing.” – Ed Whelan, a one-time clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia and now president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center (3/4/10)

Imagine a judicial candidate that is so far to the left that even Obama’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, is hesitant to push him forward.

Imagine a liberal law professor that not only fails to meet the ABA’s basic requirements for a federal judge, but is so green behind the ears that it appears the only reason he is being nominated to the federal courts is because he served as part of President Obama’s transition team.

If you can imagine such a leftist candidate, then you would be thinking of Goodwin Liu, the President’s recent nominee for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Liu is the Associate Dean and Professor of Law at the ultra-left UC Berkeley School of Law. Only 39 years old, he comes nowhere near fulfilling the ABA’s standards for a judge.

But what he lacks in experience, he makes up for in radical liberalism. In a recent book that he co-authored, Liu says that, “Applications of constitutional text and principles must be open to adaptation and change… as the conditions and norms of our society become ever more distant from those of the Founding generation.”

Got it? Like many radical progressives, Liu believes that our rights are constantly evolving. The Second Amendment might have been necessary in the 1700s, he believes, but now those rights are no longer necessary.

In Liu’s world, there would be no gun rights

Noted author David Kopel cites a law journal article of Liu’s where he criticizes the Supreme Court for declaring two gun control laws as unconstitutional – the Brady Law’s unfunded mandate and the Gun-Free School Zones Act.

Liu said that Supreme Court cases like these did “damage” to civil rights and “upset settled understandings of congressional power.” What?! Striking down gun control laws does damage to civil rights? Well, let’s be clear: the Court did upset someone’s “settled” understanding of things, but it was the LIBERAL’S misunderstanding of the Constitution.

By the way, Liu co-authored the 2002 law journal article with then-Senator Hillary Clinton… which should tell us all we need to know about Liu’s liberal, anti-gun views!

Rights evolve over time?

The bottom line is that Liu would not be a stickler for the Constitution if he were to sit on the appellate court.

“It becomes pretty clear why ‘originalism’ and ‘strict construction’ don’t make a lot of sense,” Liu said in an interview promoting his book. “The Framers deliberately chose… broad words so they would be adaptable to new challenges over time.”

No wonder that the ranking Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jeff Sessions (R-AL), spoke out so forcefully against the nomination of Goodwin Liu:

“I am very disappointed by President Obama’s nomination of Professor Goodwin Liu to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit…
Instead of nominating an individual who has demonstrated an impartial commitment to following the Constitution and the rule of law, President Obama has selected someone far outside the mainstream of American jurisprudence. Professor Liu believes that judges should look to “evolving norms and social understandings” in interpreting the Constitution, he has a history of advocating for racial preferences, and he served on the Board of the directors of the ACLU.”

2

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/35493.html

Democrats are rejecting a Republican push to delay the nomination hearing for controversial Obama judicial nominee Goodwin Liu, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said Wednesday.

Republicans have demanded more time to review a list additional speaking engagements and materials that Liu added to his committee questionnaire on Tuesday. The late coming documents from Liu have revealed controversial statements about affirmative action, school busing and his interpretation of the Constitution, and conservatives are gearing up to try to block Liu’s nomination to the 9th Circuit.

“While I am disappointed that Professor Liu did not earlier provide the materials in the supplement sent to the committee … the materials included there hardly disqualify him from serious consideration by this committee,” Leahy wrote to Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

Liu’s confirmation hearing has already been delayed once, after Senate Republicans used procedural motions to shut down most Senate hearings during the health care debate. Leahy pointed out that Republicans will have had seven weeks from the date of the original hearing to review Liu’s questionnaire and two weeks to look over the new materials.

“I see no reason to further delay this nominee’s opportunity to appear before the committee and respond to the questions its members may have,” Leahy wrote.

Republicans shot back later Wednesday saying they will continue to press for new hearing date.

“Given the alarming nature of Liu’s writings and speeches, and the fact that he withheld them from our committee, it is critical that we have sufficient time to study the newly uncovered material and determine what else may be missing,” Sessions said in a written statement. “Failing to postpone the hearing erodes respect for the rules of our committee and the constitutional confirmation process overall.”

Sessions also noted that Liu’s hearing was originally scheduled to take place 16 days after President Barack Obama nominated him—far shorter than the average of 179 days it took for a Bush nominee to receive a hearing, Sessions said.

Liu’s hearing is scheduled for April 16, and will be chaired by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). Liu is a professor at the University of California Berkeley law school.

Liu apologized to the committee for the omissions, which he said were inadvertent. But Republicans suggested he intentionally concealed the new items because some of the writings reveal potentially controversial positions and outline liberal views on a wide range of issues.

Lawyers across the political spectrum jumped to Liu’s defense Wednesday.

“Most of these items are the types of things that law professors do routinely and frequently. They are nearly impossible to keep track of,” Minnesota law professor Richard Painter, a conservative lawyer who served as President Bush’s ethics adviser and helped prepare Bush’s nominees for Senate hearings, wrote on his blog Legal Ethics Forum. “The Senate questionnaires are lengthy and ask for just about everything. … It appears to me, however, that his original answers to the questions were a careful and good faith effort to supply the Senate with the information it needed to assess his nomination.”

Conservatives are particularly concerned about Liu’s statement that the Constitution should be viewed “in light of changing needs, conditions and understandings of our society” and could possibly provide “affirmative welfare rights.”

At 39, he is one of the youngest nominees, and his gold-plated credentials as the son of immigrants who rose to attend Yale Law School and become a Rhodes Scholar have him on numerous short lists for a future Supreme Court nomination.

3

Another liberal activist judge going to SCOTUS…:frowning:

4
5

Nothing I hate more than minority leftists showing out for their statist masters.

6

And we’ll get screwed…

7

I hope we still have a country when barrys 4 years are up:(

8
9

On the flip side… Battle begins for 2012 GOP nominee. Follow link for poll, currently Ron Paul has 41% :smiley:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20001874-503544.html

Every four years, in between presidential elections, conservative activists gather to take stock of some of the most prominent names in the Republican Party – and consider which of them has what it takes for a successful run for the White House.

That gathering, the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, takes place this Thursday through Saturday in New Orleans. Among the speakers will be Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Bobby Jindal, Michael Steele, and Sarah Palin, whose speech will be closely watched for signs as to whether the former Alaska governor is serious about a presidential run or is opting instead a lucrative media career.

Notably absent, oddly enough, will be the only two prominent Republicans who have been doing the most staff hiring, fundraising, travel and networking to lay the groundwork for a 2012 run: Former Massachusetts governor and 2008 GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, who has elected to continue his book tour instead of coming to the conference, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who pulled out in order to attend a welcome home ceremony for members of the armed forces.

Both men are widely expected to jump in the race, but both have their liabilities. While Romney has worked hard to establish his conservative credentials after taking moderate positions on some issues as Massachusetts governor, some on the right continue to be skeptical of him. And the passage of a health care reform package that looks a lot like the health care bill Romney signed into law in Massachusetts has had the ex-governor straining to make the case that the Massachusetts model has legitimate differences with what conservatives derisively call “ObamaCare.”

Pawlenty, meanwhile, is unknown to most Americans. While he has been making all the right moves to prepare for a presidential run, including raising money for and endorsing anti-spending Republican candidates, he has not come close to capturing the imagination of the GOP faithful. Perhaps in an effort to break through and generate a little buzz – and also draw a distinction with Romney – Pawlenty is pushing a lawsuit to overturn the health care bill. (He’s also not skipping the conference entirely – organizers tell Hotsheet he plans to send in a video address for the event.)

The current landscape means that many conservatives are hoping that a plausible alternative to Pawlenty and Romney emerges in the coming months – perhaps spurred by a winning speech at the conference seen by many as the unofficial kickoff to primary campaign season.

Palin, seemingly the brightest light in the GOP, remains a polarizing figure who many Republicans believe could not win in a general election; she has also laid little groundwork for a presidential run. The activists gathered at the conference will be looking for signs that the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee is interested in a run and willing to do the necessary hard work to win – or if she seems content to focus on her burgeoning media career, including her planned television show, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska.”

Jindal, the Louisiana governor, has steadily climbed back into the good graces of the GOP ran-and-file despite a disastrous response to President Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress in February of last year. But his appearance may be more about continuing to build up goodwill than an attempt to set up a run that could be seen as premature.

Gingrich, meanwhile, seems an ever-present part of the presidential speculation who enjoys his image as an ideas man and elder statesman in the party. The former House speaker has said repeatedly he is considering a run – though many GOP insiders believe Gingrich, who has past personal issues that would come under scrutiny if he were to enter the race, is simply trying to keep up his public profile and speaking fees.

Paul, of course, is a libertarian-leaning Republican who could well duplicate his 2008 run, but he is seen as a candidate with passionate but limited appeal within the party. Paul won the straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February, though critics were quick to point out that the respondents were not necessarily representative of the GOP as a whole.

As for Steele, no one expects a presidential run from the Republican National Committee chair. But the speech is important regardless, since Steele has come under fire after a string of scandals, including, most recently, revelations that the committee paid a nearly $2,000 reimbursement for a group of young donors to enjoy a night out at a bondage-themed nightclub.

Steele will be looking to convince activists that he is not running a free-spending organization and convince them to continue donating to the RNC – and to not forsake the organization in favor of a shadow RNC group called American Crossroads or direct their donations primarily to candidates or campaign committees.

That brings us to the lesser-known speakers, some of whom are plausible candidates to eventually emerge their party’s standard bearer. (Keep in mind, most Americans didn’t know much about Barack Obama back in 2006.) Among them are Rep. Mike Pence, the House Republican Conference Chairman from Indiana who calls himself “a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order.” Pence has been traveling the nation, ostensibly to help House Republicans raise money. But the trips have driven speculation that he’s been testing the waters for a 2012 run, possibly with the backing of many in the Tea Party movement.

Also speaking is former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who Pennsylvania political scientists G. Terry Madonna and Michael Young say may be laying the groundwork for push for the nomination; so is Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, the head of the Republican Governors Association, who has notably declined to shut the door on a run.

One key question going into the conference is what rhetoric Republicans will offer when it comes to the health care bill. While anger in the base has driven a push for repeal, many GOP lawmakers see risks of voter backlash in such an effort; the comments at the conference could set the tone for the GOP message on the bill going into the midterm elections. (One message now being floated is “repeal and replace” – which comes with the implicit promise that the more popular of the bill’s provisions, like bans on turning people away for pre-existing conditions, would not be eliminated if Republicans attain enough power to be able to repeal the bill.)

After listening to the speakers, attendees at the conference will vote in the straw poll; if Romney wins despite not attending (or comes in second behind Paul) it will be taken as a sign of his strength. But it’s worth noting that the winner of the 2006 straw poll, Sen. Bill Frist, never even entered the 2008 race.

A victory by a more below-the-radar lawmaker such as Pence could help generate buzz and establish him as a strong alternative to Romney and Pawlenty.

On the flip side, a particularly poor performance would be taken as a sign that a candidate has little institutional support – a fate Palin, who came in a distant third at the CPAC straw poll, will want to avoid if she is ultimately interested in taking the plunge.

10
11

Absolutely. I’ve read some of his book and think he’s the only thing different anymore, Republicans = Democrats on many, many levels. All his ideas may not coincide with mine but I think he’s the most honest, up front and pro-Constitution out of anybody we’ve seen in a long time!

12

Romney - feh! We are seriously fukked if this is the best opponent the GOP can come up with!

13

nominee is a lefty= no justifiable cause for filibuster

nominee intentionally fails to disclose all of his writings= filibuster

I hope the GOP sticks to its guns and blocks this guy for as long as they can. He’s well-known as a bad seed.