Friday

Harry Reid is an idiot. Here is the proof.

Harry Reid shooting a bird



The following article is from reviewjournal.com

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION: Reid criticizes lawyers group


Democratic leader praises judicial nominee's 'real world' qualifications


WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., criticized the American Bar Association on Thursday, saying it should "get a new life" in how it rates prospective federal judges, after one of his choices got a mixed review.


In remarks to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Reid said the bar association's ratings board puts too much weight on whether judicial nominees have prior bench experience and overlooks "real world" qualifications.
"...rating board puts too much weight on whether judicial have prior bench experience and overlooks "real world" qualifications." What exactly is Harry Reid talking about?


Reid expanded his criticism to include the Supreme Court, whose makeup, he said, consists of "people who have never seen the outside world."


"I have asked President (Barack) Obama, 'Let's get somebody on the court that has not been a judge.' They need to do more than thinking of themselves as these people who walk around in these robes in these fancy chambers."
Let me get this right, Harry Reid wants President Obama to appoint someone to the bench who has never been a judge? We had better pray they do not pass health care or Harry Reid will be appointing doctors who have never been to medical school. The idea that someone who has "real world" experience is more qualified to interpret law and set precedent than someone who has actually worked as a judge is insulting and ludicrous.

I guess its not too large a stretch considering we have a sitting President in Barack Obama who has no experience as an executive. How's that working out for us?

Could it bee that Harry Reid is more interested in seating a judicial activist than he is in seating a qualified candidate?

Gloria Navarro nevada

Reid was set off by the ABA's rating of Las Vegas attorney Gloria Navarro, who also appeared before the Senate committee as his choice and Obama's nominee to become a U.S. district judge in Nevada.


According to the association's 15-member Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, a "substantial majority," consisting of 10 to 13 members, rated Navarro "qualified," while a minority rated her "not qualified."


The bar shares its ratings in an advisory capacity with the White House and the Senate, which votes on the nominees.

The committee considers a nominee's "professional competence, integrity and judicial temperament." It rates each nominee as "well qualified," "qualified," or "not qualified."


Navarro, 42, has been in private practice, has been a public defender and currently is chief deputy district attorney in the civil division of the Clark County district attorney's office.


Several attorneys and academics who examined Navarro's resume speculated that her lack of experience as a judge may have been the reason some ABA reviewers rated her "not qualified" for the federal bench.

Reid told the Judiciary Committee it was "upsetting to me" that Navarro "is not rated as high as she should be rated."
I suppose in Harry Reid's estimation since he wants her to serve she must qualified. The inner machinations of a Democrat's mind defy understanding.

"If they base their rating on people having judicial experience, that would mean that, according to them, every person that seeks a seat on the bench has to have judicial experience. Maybe a municipal court judge, maybe a justice of the peace.


"I just cannot accept that," Reid said, touting Navarro as an attorney who has pursued political corruption cases, defended a person who had been convicted of murder, and has had to pursue clients to pay their bills.
Taking Harry Reid's above statements at face value the average bill collector would be qualified to serve as a judge. Reid's argument oversimplifies the issue just a bit. I imagine the board would have found Navarro highly qualified to serve as a justice of the peace or a municipal judge but that is not the position she was being appointed to. 

"I think the ABA should get a new life and start looking at people for how they are qualified and not whether they have judicial experience," Reid said.
Uh, Mr. Reid, judicial experience is a way to determine "how they are qualified". I'm not sure what other measures of qualification Harry Reid would like to see applied. 

"This woman will be a terrific judge," he said of Navarro. "She has had experience in the real world of government, the real world of law."


It appeared to be the first time Reid has expressed unhappiness publicly with the ABA rating system. On at least two other occasions he referenced them in cases where they backed him up on specific nominees.

And herein lies the real issue. It is not a matter of whether the American Bar Association is right or wrong, only whether or not they agree with Mr. Reid. 

In a May 2006 speech opposing Brett Kavanaugh for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, Reid noted the ABA had lowered its rating on the nominee. In a May 2000 interview with the Review-Journal, Reid cited the ABA as approving his choice of then U.S. Magistrate Roger Hunt for a federal judgeship.


Reid believes "the ABA rating can be helpful but it isn't the final word," his spokesman Jon Summers said Thursday. "You have to look at why the ABA gave the rating and consider additional factors such as the recommendations of the people they have worked with."
..."additional factors such as the recommendations of the people they worked with?" Excellent idea! We could parade a line of accused and convicted murderers before Congress to give character recommendations for Navarro. That should prove interesting. 

Navarro would be the first Hispanic woman to serve as a federal judge in Nevada. She would replace Brian Sandoval, who resigned the lifetime appointment last year and is running for governor.


A spokeswoman for the Judiciary Committee said senators have a week to ask follow-up questions in writing. After that, the committee will schedule a confirmation vote.


The Nevadan appeared Thursday before the committee alongside five other nominees for judgeships in Indiana, California and Missouri.


Navarro had waited out the snowstorm that crippled Capitol Hill this week, as the confirmation meeting was postponed a day because of the weather.


She appeared alone, explaining her husband, Clark County chief deputy district attorney Brian Rutledge, their three sons, her mother and several friends were unable to make it.


"We'll send them a DVD," joked Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.


During her testimony, Navarro appeared ready for a question about her experience, which came from Klobuchar.


Navarro said she has practiced both in federal and state courts, handled both civil and criminal cases, has represented plaintiffs and defendants and has been both in private practice and as a public servant.


"The experiences have given me the opportunity to appear before many different judges with many different styles," she said. "I have also had the opportunity to become familiar with many different rules and procedures in different courts. Having that broad range of experience definitely will build a solid foundation for a successful judicial career."


Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or 202-783-1760.

Without commenting on the qualifications of Navarro I find Harry Reid's lack of professionalism appalling. The American bar Association does not deserve the ire of a legislator for doing nothing more than what they have been tasked to do. We should Hold Reid accountable for his reckless statements and lack of basic courtesy.

2 comments:

  1. What in the world is Harry Thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Statutes in general are inherently ambiguous. Over the years, many a study has shown that patterns of judicial decision-making are weighted heavily by
    age, gender and race. All one can say is that "judicial temperament", essentially an impartial openness to argument, is a key criterion. Ideological poseurs such as Mde. Sotomayer, whose cliche feministical/racial prejudices are entirely predictable regardless of any word-of-law, have no business on any Court-- which of course is why the likes of Harry "the Senator" Reid elevate 'em at every opportunity.

    Phony-baloney partisans of this sad ilk know very well that skewing judicial candidacies furthers their collectivist Statist agenda, Rule of Law be hanged. When called out, Reid/Pelosi-crats waffle and fuss, hurl insults, declaim high dudgeon. But they care nothing for Constitutional substance; co-opting any predictably anti-legal recruit suits them just fine.

    ReplyDelete

Be respectful or be deleted. Your choice.