Republicans went hard after Goodwin Liu, the Obama administration's nominee to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Liu had been targeted by conservative groups because of his outspoken liberal views--and Republicans made good use of the opposition research gathered by conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation. Liu's failure to fully disclose all of his legal writings to the Senate Judiciary Committee had already given ammunition to his critics.
A substantial portion of the hearing was devoted to Republican senators settling scores with Liu over his criticism of Republican judicial nominees. Sen. Jeff Sessions criticized Liu for having been critical of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. After reading off a list of Roberts' qualifications, Sessions asked, "How do you compare your experience to now Chief Justice John Roberts?" Liu was deferential in response, saying, "Any nominee would be fearful of comparing their records to the Chief Justice." He also said he used "unnecessarily colorful language" in his criticism of Justice Alito, which conservatives have compared to Ted Kennedy's criticism of Robert Bork.
That was as cordial as the exchanges between Liu and his Republican critics got. Tom Coburn said that Liu's criticisms of Alito “calls into question your ability to approach and characterize people’s positions in a fair and juidicious way,” calling Liu's words "emotionally and racially charged." John Cornyn picked up that ball and ran with it, saying he wondered “is this the right job for you, it’s not a matter of brilliance, it’s not a matter of your academic skill."
“If a lawyer came into my courtroom and failed to respond completely and accurately to a request from the other side for information, and had to be called to request four different times" Cornyn said, "that lawyer would be held in contempt of court or worse.” Cornyn added, “I don't know if it's because of your lack of experience in a courtroom, or what it is."
Cornyn and the other Republicans on the committee didn't feel as strongly about judicial nominees submitting supplemental materials to Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaires after the fact back when several Republican nominees--including Alito and Roberts--were nominated. Senator Diane Feinstein noted that both Supreme Court nominees submitted thousands of pages of supplemental materials after originally turning in their questionnaires.
“I think there is a double standard being applied here,” Feinstein said. If the stakes over Liu's nomination seem oddly high, it's because he's essentially the canary in the coal mine for future liberal nominees. If Liu's nomination succeeds, he could make it all the way to the high court should a vacancy open. If his nomination fails, as Dahlia Lithwick noted, the Obama administration is likely to shy away from going to the mat for future liberal nominees.
-- A. Serwer
