Opening Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy,
Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee
Hearing For Priscilla Owen
Nominee To The Court Of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit
July 23, 2002
I begin by
thanking Senator Feinstein for chairing today’s hearing and all
Senators who have agreed to chair nominations hearings since the
change in majority last summer. Today we hold a hearing to consider
the 79th, 80th and 81st judicial
nominees for whom this Committee has held hearings since last July
11. Judge Owen is the 17th Court of Appeals nominee for
whom we have held hearings in less than 13 months. The
fact is that we have held more hearings for more circuit court
nominees than in any of the six and one-half years in which
Republicans controlled the Committee before the change in majority
last summer.
During our first
year in the majority, we held twice as many hearings for President
Bush’s Courts of Appeals nominees as were held in the first year of
the Reagan Administration, when the Senate was controlled by
Republicans, and five times as many as in the first year of the
Clinton Administration, when the Senate was controlled by Democrats.
Those are the facts.
Under Democratic
leadership, this Committee has also voted on more judicial nominees,
75, than in any of the six and one-half years of Republican control
that preceded the change in majority. We voted on twice as many
circuit court nominees, 15, as the Republican majority averaged in the
years they were in control. In fact, this last year we voted on more
nominees than were voted on in 1999 and 2000 combined and on more
circuit court nominees than Republicans voted on in 1996 and 1997
combined.
We have achieved
what we said we would by treating President Bush’s nominees more
fairly and more expeditiously than President Clinton’s nominees were
treated. By many measures the Committee has achieved almost twice as
much this last year as Republicans averaged during their years in
control.
In the six and
one-half year period of Republican control before the change in
majority last summer, vacancies on the Courts of Appeals more than
doubled from 16 to 33 and overall vacancies rose from 63 to 110. We
have reversed those trends.
Today, the
Committee proceeds with a hearing on the nomination of Priscilla Owen
to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Timothy
Corrigan for the District Court for the Middle District of Florida,
and Jose Martinez for the District Court for the Southern District of
Florida. I welcome the nominees, their families and their friends,
and all those interested in these important matters.
Judge Owen has
been nominated to fill a seat vacated by William Garwood, a Reagan
appointee who served until taking senior status in January, 1997. Not
long afterwards, on July 24, 1997, President Clinton nominated Jorge
Rangel, a distinguished Hispanic attorney from Corpus Christi, to fill
that vacancy. Despite his qualifications, and his unanimous rating of
Well Qualified by the ABA, Mr. Rangel never received a hearing from
the Committee, and his nomination was returned to the President
without Senate action at the end of 1998, after a fruitless wait of 15
months. Frustrated with the lack of action on his nomination, Mr.
Rangel asked that his name be withdrawn from consideration, and on
September 16, 1999, President Clinton nominated Enrique Moreno,
another outstanding Hispanic attorney, to fill that same vacancy. Mr.
Moreno did not receive a hearing on his nomination either during its
pendency of more than 17 months. President Bush withdrew the
nomination of Enrique Moreno to the Fifth Circuit and later sent Judge
Owen’s name in its place. It was not until May of this year, at a
hearing before Senator Schumer, that this Committee heard from any of
President Clinton’s three nominees to the 5th Circuit, when
Mr. Moreno testified along with a number of other Clinton nominees
about their treatment by the Republican majority. Thus, Judge Owen’s
is the third nomination to this vacancy and the first to be accorded a
hearing before this Committee.
In fact, when
this Committee held its hearing on the nomination of Judge Edith
Clement to the Fifth Circuit last fall, it was the first hearing on a
Fifth Circuit nominee in seven years. By contrast, Judge Owen is the
third nomination to the Fifth Circuit on which this Committee has held
a hearing in less than one year.
When Judge Owen
was initially nominated, the President changed the confirmation
process from that used by Republican and Democratic Presidents for
more than 50 years. That resulted in her ABA peer review not being
received until later in the summer. As a result of a Republican
objection to the Democratic leadership’s request to retain all
judicial nominations pending before the Senate through the August
recess, the initial nomination of Justice Owen was required by Senate
rules to be returned to the President without action. The Committee
nonetheless took the unprecedented action of proceeding during the
August recess to hold two hearings involving judicial nominations,
including a nominee to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In my efforts to
accommodate a number of Republican Senators, including the Republican
Leader, this Committee’s ranking member, and at least four other
Republican members of this Committee, I have scheduled hearings for
nominees out of the order in which they were received. This has been
a longstanding practice of the Committee. I have also indicated that
those nominations that are less controversial are easier to consider
and would, by and large, be scheduled earlier. Controversial
nominations, such as Judge Owen’s, can sometimes take longer. In
spite of the treatment by the former Republican majority of so many
moderate judicial nominees of the previous President, we proceed
today, as I said that we would, with a hearing on Judge Owen.
Despite a history
of filling vacancies in Florida through a nonpartisan, merit-based
process, going back at least a decade under two presidents of
different political parties, this White House decided it knew better.
Despite a process that filled 29 vacancies on Florida’s federal
district courts and despite a consensus within the Florida legal
community that the process of working with that State’s Senators and a
judicial nomination commission process had produced distinguished,
qualified nominees, this Administration decided to go in a different
direction. I commend Senators Graham and Nelson for being able to
come to some agreement so that we can move these nominations forward
at this time.
The question each
Senator on this Committee will be asking himself or herself as we
proceed is whether these judicial nominees meet the standards we
require for any lifetime appointments to the federal courts. The
President has often spoken of judicial activism without acknowledging
that ends-oriented decisionmaking can come easily to ideological
conservative nominees. Through the course of these hearings we will
have an opportunity to seek to determine how nominees are likely to
act as federal judges.
# # # # #
|