Silberman's Statement

Public statements are a dime a dozen from companies, government agencies and public officials. But they remain a rarity in one key branch of government: the judiciary. So it came as some surprise when Senior Judge Laurence Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a public statement this morning to "dispel" misstatements about his position and job prospects in other branches of government.

For the record, Silberman wrote, "I was never a candidate for White House Counsel; I never indicated to a soul any interest in that position. The same is true of the position of Attorney General." (Legal Times reported this week that Silberman had been vetted for White House counsel and indicated he was a possible replacement for the job of AG.)

But the same couldn't be said for the newly created job of director of national intelligence, a post that went to John Negroponte. "I declined to be considered for that post in January and Februray of 2005," he wrote, citing a potential "conflict of interest" with his role on the presidentially appointed committee that reviewed pre-war Iraq intelligence.

But in August of 2006, when he wasn't hearing cases, "I was willing to be considered for the DNI postion should John Negropnte leave," Silberman wrote. "After I began sitting [on the bench] in September, I felt uncomfortable with that situation."

Oh, and in case anyone was unclear, Silberman noted: he is not a retired judge, but a senior judge, meaning he still hears cases, just a reduced number.

Comments

[Adam]

His discomfort is interesting -- Jan Crawford Greenburg may be able to clear this up (I don't have her book handy), but wasn't Silberman interviewed for SCOTUS spots while he was hearing cases in the 1980s? Why the change in comfort? I'd think that aspirations for Supreme Court seats give would give rise to no less an opportunity for impropriety than would aspirations for Executive Branch jobs. (In my opinion, none of those cases are true cause for concern.)

And is he saying that the current Chief was wrong to interview for the High Court spot back when he was hearing cases?