Litigation

Roberts Urges End to Stalls Over Nominations

By Peter Hardin

Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., in his year-end report on the federal judiciary,  sternly criticized the partisan politics that has stalled judicial nominations and resulted in some courts facing “extraordinary caseloads.”

Justice Roberts also cited the economic downturn as another of two key “immediate obstacles” to achieving the goals of the federal judiciary.

Regarding the partisan squabbling that has delayed scores of judicial nominations, Justice Roberts lamented “the persistent problem of judicial vacancies,” called it a systemic problem and said it cries out with “urgent need” for  resolution.

There were news articles on the year-end report in these newspapers, among others: The New York Times; Wall Street Journal; Washington Post; and Los Angeles Times.

Here are key excerpts from his report:

“The judiciary relies on the President?s nominations and the Senate?s confirmation process to fill judicial vacancies; we do not comment on the merits of individual nominees.  That is as it should be.  The judiciary must respect the constitutional prerogatives of the President and Congress in the same way that the judiciary expects respect for its constitutional role.

“Over many years, however, a persistent problem has developed in the process of filling judicial vacancies.  Each political party has found it easy to turn on a dime from decrying to defending the blocking of judicial nominations, depending on their changing political fortunes.  This has created acute difficulties for some judicial districts.  Sitting judges in those districts have been burdened with extraordinary caseloads.

“I am heartened that the Senate recently filled a number of district and circuit court vacancies, including one in the Eastern District of California, one of the most severely burdened districts.  There remains, however, an urgent need for the political branches to find a long-term solution to this recurring problem.”

According to the Wall Street Journal article, Justice Roberts’ report was written to fault both political parties, but effectively it delivered “a knock against Senate Republicans, who have fought to minimize the imprint President Barack Obama leaves on the federal bench.”

Several of the news articles noted that a decade ago, Chief Justice William Rehnquist urged action by Senate Republicans on President Clinton’s judicial nominees in a higher-profile critique. Justice Roberts did not address judicial nominations until the last section of his 16-paragraph text.

In his first two years in office, Obama saw the Senate confirm 62 of his judge nominees, including two Supreme Court justices. In recent action, the Senate failed to vote on 19 judicial nominees (see Gavel Grab for further background).

Regarding budget constraints, Justice Roberts outlined fiscal disciplines in place across the federal judiciary. He added this about the nation’s highest court:

“The Supreme Court itself is doing its part.  I have asked Court personnel to monitor Court operations and seek out opportunities to reduce spending by improving operations and cutting unnecessary expenses.  As a result of those efforts, and notwithstanding increases in operating costs owing to inflation, the Court expects to voluntarily reduce its fiscal year 2012 appropriations request to less than its fiscal year 2011 request.  Not many other federal government entities can say that.”

Full post as published by The Gavel on January 03, 2011 (boomark / email).