Daily Report, May 19, 2014
U.S.
Rep. John Lewis, the dean of Georgia's congressional Democrats, announced in
strong language today that he would not support the confirmation of Georgia
Court of Appeals Judge Michael Boggs to the federal bench in Atlanta.
Lewis
urged his colleagues in the U.S. Senate—some of whom had said they would seek
Lewis' counsel on the matter—to vote against Boggs' confirmation.
"His
record is in direct opposition to everything I have stood for during my career,
and his misrepresentation of that record to the committee is even more troubling,"
Lewis said in a statement, headlined "Rep. John Lewis Does Not Support the
Confirmation of Judge Michael Boggs."
"The
testimony suggests Boggs may allow his personal political leanings to influence
his impartiality on the bench," Lewis said.
Lewis
issued the statement less than 24 hours after Rep. David Scott, a Democrat who
represents Jonesboro and Smyrna, told the Huffington Post that if Lewis were to
support Boggs' confirmation he would have "betrayed Georgia."
"He
is speaking for the White House and not women, African-Americans or gays with
this new position, and he has turned his back on his own supporters,"
Scott told the online newspaper on Sunday.
Scott
talked to the Huffington Post after Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a member
of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on CNN's "State of the Union"
that despite serious concerns about Boggs, she was swayed by Lewis's private assurance that Boggs
was part of "a good ticket" of nominees.
Critics
have attacked Boggs for his votes while a Georgia legislator to restrict
abortions, post a public registry of doctors who performed them, bar same-sex
marriage in the state and retain the Confederate battle emblem as part of the
state flag.
Feinstein
told CNN that she was not ready to announce how she would vote on Boggs because
of her conversation with Lewis, insisting, "I know he has some very strong
support, even in the African-American community in the state of Georgia."
Last
winter, that support did not include Lewis, along with two fellow recipients of
the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Dr. Joseph Lowery and the Rev. C.T. Vivian.
Like Lewis, they are former leaders of the civil rights movement.
Lewis
said at a Dec. 23 news conference after the President nominated Boggs as part
of a package deal with Georgia's Republican senators that he intended to
testify against Boggs at his confirmation hearing.
On
Monday, Lewis said, "I have fought long and hard and even put my life on
the line for the cause of equal rights and social justice. My commitment to these
ideals has never changed, and my record is solid and unwavering. I take a
back-seat to no one and have been at the forefront for decades in defense of
the right to marry, a women's right to choose, and the imperative of
non-violence as a means of dissent. I have worked tirelessly to rid Georgia,
the South, and this nation from the stain of racial discrimination in any form,
including the display of Confederate emblems in the Georgia state flag. I am
not about to change that position now."
Lewis
said that he had of late refrained from making public statements about Boggs
"out of respect for my colleagues and the Senate process. I believe it is
important to allow each candidate to be evaluated according to his or her own
merits and to allow the Senate judicial nomination process to take its course.
This willingness to permit due process is all that I have indicated in any
conversation I may have had with my colleagues." But, added, "I did
not at any time indicate my support for the Boggs nomination or say that he had
the backing of the African-American community in Georgia."
Boggs
defended or explained his legislative record by saying that he was carrying out
the wishes of his constituents in voting for bills he told the committee were
"ill-conceived," "inappropriate" or a violation of his own
conscience.
Boggs
was also taken to task by Democratic committee members for omitting any mention
in his Senate questionnaire of his support as a legislator for a constitutional
amendment barring same-sex marriage, his votes on the Georgia flag and for
abortion bills supported by Georgia's pro-life movement.
The
nominee also was challenged by U.S. Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., whether the
judge's re-election campaign's contributions to Georgia Conservatives in
Action, which is incorporated as a tax-exempt social welfare organization, may
have been a violation of the Georgia Code of Judicial Ethics.
On
Monday, Scott's office issued a statement praising Lewis for his announcement.
"This statement by Rep. Lewis is wonderful," Scott's statement said.
"It clears any doubt to the Senate that Georgia Democrats oppose the Boggs
nomination. We are all united against his views on the Confederate flag,
anti-choice laws, and LGBT progress. We ask the Senate to reject him. There are
thousands of qualified attorneys in Georgia who could be considered."
Boggs
was part of a deal that senators Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss struck with
the White House to end a political impasse that had left three seats vacant on
the U.S. District Court bench in Atlanta and two vacant seats on the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. There are now seven nominees from Georgia
awaiting action from Georgia.
Last
Thursday, Isakson told The Huffington Post that the deal he and
Chambliss struck that allowed them to name four of what were then six open
slots included a provision that the Judiciary Committee "would hear all
seven of them and the committee would vote whichever way they vote."
Isakson's
office would not elaborate on any understanding he might have as to how the
vote would take place and whether the nominees would be voted on as a bloc
rather than individually. On Monday, an Isakson spokeswoman referred the Daily
Report's questions to the Judiciary Committee.
There
an aide referred the Daily Report to a statement that Judiciary Committee
Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., issued midway through Boggs' confirmation
hearing last week.
In
that statement, Leahy said, "There is no 'deal' negotiated with me as
chairman. ... The constitutional responsibility of advice and consent resides
with each individual senator, and there is no such thing as a binding deal that
negates each senator's responsibility to determine the fitness of a judicial
nominee for a lifetime appointment."
A
Chambliss spokeswoman said the senator does not comment on judicial nominees.
No comments:
Post a Comment