• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« DOJ won't defend Defense of Marriage Act | Main | Morning Wrap »

February 23, 2011


Kent Scheidegger

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?

Dread Not

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


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.

Kent Scheidegger

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.



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...

Kent Scheidegger

Rick, my comment was on the correct vote, not whether there should be a vote.



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..

Kent Scheidegger

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.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad