Republicans will get a second chance to question Goodwin Liu, who is one of President Barack Obama's most contentious judicial nominees, and Liu will get another opportunity to answer the criticism.
The Senate Judiciary Committee gave notice today that it will hold a second confirmation hearing for Liu. The hearing is set for Wednesday, March 2. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a staunch supporter of the nominee, is scheduled to preside over the hearing.
Obama nominated Liu a year ago to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Widely seen as a potential future Supreme Court nominee, Liu is a professor at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. He’s also a former O’Melveny & Myers associate and former clerk to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Republican criticisms of Liu have been harsh. During his confirmation hearing in April 2010, GOP senators laid into Liu over his academic writings and his testimony in 2006 against the confirmation of Justice Samuel Alito Jr. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who voted for both of Obama’s nominees for the Supreme Court, has said he might oppose Liu.
The second hearing could include the committee’s two newest members, Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah). Blumenthal clerked for Justice Harry Blackmun, while Lee clerked for Alito twice. When The National Law Journal asked Lee about the nomination this month, he demurred. “I will review that nomination thoroughly and carefully and give it the consideration it deserves,” Lee said.
In January, committee aides said that senators were negotiating whether any judicial nominees announced during the 111th Congress would need second hearings during the 112th. Liu would be the first.
Update (2/24): The hearing will also be the first opportunity for Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) to question Liu. Coons took office in November.
There is no basis for the assertion that opposition to Liu is racially motivated. My opposition and my organization's would be exactly the same regardless of his ethnicity.
As for the claim that a person should be confirmed if "qualified" despite his out-of-the-mainstream views, that notion was refuted in 2006 by Goodwin Liu.
BTW, "Dread Not," if you are going to make accusations against other people, how about having the courage to sign your name?
Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | March 02, 2011 at 12:31 PM
Professor Liu is the one of the most qualified person ever to be nominated to be a federal judge. Go ask Ken Starr - the Republican who went after Bill Clinton. Even he know that Professor Liu is the best of the best and a fair judge.
This is nothing but racism. It's Anti-Sinic at its worse. Stop it - give the professor and up or down vote! Anti-Sinicism has not place in America
Posted by: Dread Not | March 01, 2011 at 09:06 PM
Goodwin Liu does NOT "deserve" a vote. It would be a travesty and mockery of the system if Goodwin Liu were treated any differently from Miguel Estrada. I pray that the Republicans do whatever it takes to block this nomination, including filibustering or whatever procedural mechanism it takes. Precisely like the Democrats did to Estrada.
"Rick" (Goodwin Liu family member???), please explain once and for all why Liu deserves to be treated any better than Estrada, or why he should not be held to the same standard he himself urged for Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts.
Posted by: Violet | February 26, 2011 at 03:33 PM
President Bush did not get all of his nominees through, and Liu is as far to the left of the American median as anyone Bush nominated was to the right.
It is most unfortunate that the Democrats chose to take us down the road of regularly filibustering nominees, but they did, and Republicans cannot unilaterally disarm. The Ninth Circuit would be a particularly inappropriate place to do so, as it remains far outside the judicial mainstream.
Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | February 25, 2011 at 07:01 PM
Kent,
I have no problem if a republican senator votes no on Liu's confirmation, just allow the vote...That "Gang of 14 Compromise" that enabled some of Bush's hard right nominees thru should apply for a democratic president to...
Posted by: Rick | February 25, 2011 at 02:14 PM
Rick, my comment was on the correct vote, not whether there should be a vote.
Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | February 25, 2011 at 01:39 PM
Kent,
Janice Rogers Brown, William Pryor, Priscilla Owen, Robert Bork, Sam Ailito, Clarence Thomas, just to name a few, are FAR FAR out of the mainstream, yet the aforementioned all had a fair hearing and vote, only one was denied confirmation...
Goodwin Liu DESERVES an up/down vote, anything less in a travesty and mockery of the judicial system..
Posted by: Rick | February 25, 2011 at 07:39 AM
The Supreme Court's term is still young, and yet we have already seen four patently wrong Ninth Circuit habeas decisions reversed without a single Justice agreeing with the Ninth. Priority one should be to make the dismal Ninth better, not worse, in its review of state criminal cases.
Regrettably, Goodwin Liu's paper attacking Samuel Alito demonstrates that he is completely in sync with the most-reversed judges of the Ninth.
As Liu himself said, intellect and integrity are not enough, and a nominee should be rejected if he is out of the mainstream. Judging this nominee by his own standard, the correct vote is no.
Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | February 24, 2011 at 06:46 PM