Judicial Appointments Bush's Judicial Appointments an Examination

Judicial Appointments Bush's Judicial Appointments An Examination of President George W. Bush's Judicial Appointments During the eight years of his presidency George W. Bush appointed two Supreme Court justices, 61 Appeals Court judges, and 261 Federal District Court judges. Judicial appointments can be one of a president's longest lasting legacies. The people President Bush named to the judiciary will be making decisions and affecting policy long after he leaves office.

Courts today, especially the Supreme Court and appeals courts, make policy that has just as much of an impact on Americans' lives as do the laws that Congress passes. President Bush recognized this fact and took his power to appoint judges very seriously. According to Christopher Miles (2010) it is hard to know exactly how the nomination process worked in the White House because those involved in the process have remained relatively silent; however some details have come to light.

In the Bush administration, a group called the Judicial Selection Committee (JSC) met twice weekly or as needed to discuss judicial appointments. The JSC consisted of Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh, the Office of Legal Policy, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, and Associate White House Counsel Brett Kavanaugh. A different group composed of higher level administration officials has also been mentioned as meeting to discuss judicial appointments. This group consisted of the White House Counsel's Office, White House Chief of Staff, Attorney General, and presidential advisor Karl Rove.

It is also clear that President Bush himself was very involved in the process. Presidential approval of each nominee was required at two points in the process, before any detailed vetting took place, and after extensive vetting but before the formal nomination was made. Furthermore, Bush made a number of changes to the judicial nominating process when he took office. The new president ejected the American Bar Association (ABA) from the screening process, ending its half-century role of reviewing candidates' credentials before a nomination.

In previous administrations, the ABA had been told that someone was being nominated before the information was given to the general public. This gave the ABA the chance to do their own investigation of the nominee, which could then be used during Senate confirmation hearings. Bush turned to lawyers who had been on Ronald Reagan's judicial selection team to help seek out prominent conservative thinkers. Joan Biskupic (2008) contends that Bush was trying to emulate Reagan, whose conservative mark on the bench has been deep and enduring.

Like their predecessors the Bush administration drew a clear distinction between district court and appeals court judicial appointments. While they might be willing to settle for district court nominees they were not fully in favor of, appeals court judges received much more scrutiny. This was for a number of reasons. District court judges essentially take the law or case precedent and apply it whatever the facts of the case they are deciding. Appeals courts deal with the much more complicated questions where the law or precedents are not that clear.

The appeals court is a good stepping stone to the Supreme Court. All of the current justices on the Supreme Court have served on appeals courts and it is out of the ordinary for a President to nominate someone to the Supreme Court who has not served on an appeals court. There are a lot fewer openings at the appeals court level than at the district court level. President Bush appointed approximately four district court judges for every appeals court appointment.

Bush's judicial appointments suggest that his motivation for appointing nontraditional judges was driven more by ideology and strategy than concerns for diversity according to an analysis by American University (2009). Elevating a judge to an appeals court for a reason other than wanting them on the court would mean one seat that could not be filled with a conservative judge.

President Bush's appointments to the United States Supreme Court, John Roberts and Samuel Alito, the two youngest of the nine justices at the time of their elevation to the court, are consistently conservative and were in the Reagan administration. Bush's appointments to the U.S. court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, considered by many a steppingstone to the Supreme Court, were Rogers Brown, 58, Brett Kavanaugh, 43, Thomas Griffith, 53, and, before he was elevated, Roberts.

Perhaps the most controversial was Brown, who as a judge on the California Supreme Court earned a reputation as a bold advocate of property rights and an opponent of affirmative action. On the 5th Circuit, covering Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana, Bush solidified conservative leanings by appointing Priscilla Owen, 53, a former Texas Supreme Court justice and longtime friend of former Bush advisers Karl Rove and Harriet Miers. He also appointed Charles Pickering on a temporary basis.

Dan Eggen, of the Washington Post (2008), reports that 10 of the nation's 13 federal appellate courts are now dominated by conservatives. "This administration has cemented a transformation of our federal judiciary begun by Ronald Reagan, which has resulted in less.