Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
702470
label
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5] : Department of Justice Appointments
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
702470
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5] : Department of Justice Appointments
citationUrl
identifierLocal
29165-010
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
John Sununu Issues Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
702470
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
076fd29cac22228a
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
1998-0004-F[1]
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin: Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
OA/ID Number:
29165
Folder ID Number:
29165-010
Folder Title:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
25
3
3
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Memo
From C. Boyden Gray to John Sununu
3/14/90
(b)(6)
Re: Judicial Selection
[FOIA RESTRICTIONS REDACTED] (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile,
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 14, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR GOVERNOR JOHN H. SUNUNU
CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAY DONG
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Judicial Selection
You were interested in a status report on judicial vacancies.
Nine judges have been confirmed this year. There are presently
69 additional vacancies. We have 21 nominees pending before the
Senate Judiciary Committee, 4 of whom have hearings scheduled for
March 22 (one of these is Norm Stahl). There are also two
hearings scheduled in April, but we do not know how many nominees
or which ones will be slated for these hearings yet. We have
another 22 candidates selected, four of whom we have not sent
into clearance yet, the issues with respect to two of which
appear likely to be resolved soon, and the
issues with respect to the two others
may take Tonger. Five candidates in clearance
are encountering some level of problem in the ABA or FBI checks,
whose seriousness we cannot assess at this time. There are 24
additional seats for which no candidates have been selected yet.
Of these, seven opened in 1988, eleven in 1989, and six in 1990.
Table
Confirmed (24) (15 in 1989, 9 in 1990)
District/
Date
Date
Circuit
Nominee
Nominated
Confirmed
1989
9th Circuit
Pamela Rymer
2/28/89
5/18/89
9th Circuit
F. Fernandez
2/28/89
5/18/89
C.D. Calif.
Robert Bonner
2/28/89
5/18/89
S.D. Texas
Melinda Harmon
2/28/89
5/18/89
1st Circuit
Conrad Cyr
8/4/89
10/24/89
D. Md.
Marvin Garbis
8/4/89
10/24/89
E.D. Va.
Rebecca Smith
8/4/89
10/24/89
2
Fed. Circuit
S. Jay Plager
9/12/89
11/8/89
N.D. Ill.
George Lindberg
9/21/89
11/3/89
N.D. Calif.
Vaughn Walker
2/28/89
11/22/89
D. Kansas
Thomas Van Bebber
9/13/89
11/22/89
2d Circuit
John Walker
9/21/89
11/22/89
D. Colorado
Edward Nottingham
10/20/89
11/22/89
E.D. New York
Arthur Spatt
10/25/89
11/22/89
D. Idaho
Edward Lodge
10/30/89
11/22/89
1990 (9)
N.D. Alabama
Edwin Nelson
9/13/89
1/23/90
E/W D. Ark.
Susan Wright
9/21/89
1/23/90
D.C. Circuit
Clarence Thomas
10/30/89
3/6/90
5th Circuit
Jacques Weiner
11/17/89
3/9/90
5th Circuit
Rhesa Barksdale
11/17/89
3/9/90
E.D. Michigan
Gerald Rosen
11/9/89
3/9/90
W.D. Penn.
Donald Lee
11/9/89
3/9/90
E.D. Penn.
Ronald Buckwalter
11/17/89
3/9/90
Claims Court
Robert Hodges
1/24/90
3/9/90
Pending Before Judiciary Committee (21)
District/
Date
Circuit
Nominee
Nominated
Hearing
1st Circuit
David Souter (no ABA)
1/24/90
Fed. Circuit
Raymond Clevenger (Q/WQ)
1/24/90
Fed. Circuit
Alan Lourie (WQ/Q)
1/24/90
3/22
S.D. New York
Lawrence McKenna (Q)
1/24/90
S.D. New York
John Martin (WQ)
1/24/90
3/22
D. N.H.
Norman Stahl (WQ)
1/24/90
3/22
D. Colorado
Daniel Sparr (WQ)
1/24/90
3/22
S.D. Texas
John Rainey (WQ)
1/24/90
N.D. Alaska
James Singleton (WQ)
1/24/90
M.D. Penn.
James McClure (WQ)
1/24/90
D. Kentucky
Joseph Hood (Q/NQ)
1/24/90
D. Maryland
William Nickerson (no ABA) 1/24/90
3d Circuit
Samuel Alito (no ABA)
2/20/90
D. Arizona
Stephen McNamee (Q)
2/20/90
E.D. Mich.
Robert Cleland (no ABA)
2/20/90
W.D.N.C.
Graham Mullen (WQ)
2/20/90
D. Oregon
Robert Jones (WQ)
2/20/90
D. Montana
Jack Shanstrom (WQ)
2/23/90
D. Maine
Brock Hornby (WQ)
3/6/90
W.D. Virginia
Sam Wilson (Q)
3/6/90
D. V. Islands
Adriane Dudley (WQ)
3/7/90
3
Selected/In Clearance (22, 4 on hold, 5 potential problems)
District/
Circuit
S.D. Alabama
D. D.C.
S.D. Florida
S.D. Florida
*W.D. Louisiana
**D. Mississippi
E.D. New York
**W.D. New York
D. South Carolina
*N.D. Texas
N.D. Texas
N.D. West Virginia
D.C. Circuit
D.C. Circuit
Fourth Circuit
**Sixth Circuit
*Eighth Circuit
Ninth Circuit
**Eleventh Circuit
Eleventh Circuit
**Federal Circuit
*Federal Circuit
* Indicates that although selected, the candidate is not in
clearance yet because of a hold placed by one or more of the
offices involved in the selection process.
** Indicates potential ABA or FBI problem
Vacancies (24)
District/
Circuit
N.D. Calif.
)
C.D. Calif.
)
E.D. Calif. (3) )
D. Delaware
D. Guam
D. Kansas
W.D. Louisiana
S.D. New York(4))
4
E.D. Pennsylvania
W.D. Pennsylvania
N.D. Texas
S.D. Texas
D. Vermont
D. Virg Islands
Second Circuit
Third Circuit
Sixth Circuit
Eleventh Circuit
Ct of Int'l Trade
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02. Memo
From C. Boyden Gray to John Sununu
9/20/89
(b)(6)
Re: Judicial Selection (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03. Memo
From Murray Dickman to John Sununu
9/20/89
(b)(6)
Re: Candidate for DoJ Position
[2 copies] (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
04. List
Deputy Attorney General Candidates
5/31/89
(b)(6)
[2 copies] (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal-personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Groups Fault Justice Dept. Nominee
For Inexperience on Juvenile Crime
27Nor89
By Ruth Marcus
tion Week about "a preponderance
the single qualification that the stat-
Washington Post Staff Writer
of studies supporting busing" that
ute requires-experience in juve-
had been done at NIE-oversaw
nile justice."
A number of groups are gearing
studies on such conservatively ori-
Although it does not take posi-
up to fight the nomination of a con-
ented issues as home schooling and
tions on nominees, the American
servative former Education Depart-
the effects of desegregation on
Bar Association is considering send-
ment official to head a Justice De-
black students' achievement. The
ing a letter to the committee urging
partment juvenile justice office, as-
desegregation study proceeded
that it scrutinize Sweet's record,
serting that his lack of experience
from the thesis that "the most im-
according to Janet Fink, who chairs
in the juvenile justice field makes
portant problem is the fact that ra-
the ABA's juvenile justice commit-
him unqualified for the job.
cial-balance busing amounts to dis-
tee.
President Bush last month nom-
crimination against minorities."
"The most major concern is that
inated Robert W. Sweet Jr., cur-
Sweet, who joined the White
the act requires that the adminis-
rently an education analyst for the
House staff after his ouster from
trator be someone with experience
Senate Republican Policy Commit-
the Education Department, has no
in juvenile justice programs," Fink
tee, to head the Office of Juvenile
formal training or experience in the
said. "We would hope that the Sen-
Justice and Delinquency Preven-
juvenile justice area. The statute
ate would ask questions concerning
tion.
establishing the office requires that
the experience level of the nomi-
The office, with an annual appro-
the administrator be appointed
nee."
priation of about $70 million, makes
"from among individuals who have
Sweet declined to comment on
grants to states and private groups
had experience in juvenile justice
his nomination. "At this point I don't
to improve the juvenile justice sys-
programs."
have any priorities per se," he told
tem, emphasizing such measures as
Citing Sweet's lack of such ex-
Child Protection Report last month.
removing juveniles from adult jails.
perience, the National PTA, the
"I haven't even been briefed on the
The Reagan administration each
American Psychological Associa-
office."
year sought to eliminate the pro-
tion, and People for the American
Justice Deparment spokesman
gram but was rebuffed by Con-
Way, a liberal lobbying group, have
David Runkel cited Sweet's "sub-
gress. President Bush sought no
written. to the Senate Judiciary
stantial experience" in education
funding in his 1990 budget request.
Committee urging that the nomi-
and his work with the Domestic Pol-
nation be withdrawn or defeated.
Sweet, a former high school sci-
icy Council at the White House.
ence teacher, textbook salesman
"It does not appear to us that
"I think his experience at the
Robert Sweet is the person for this
White House and in the education ar-
and sign store owner who headed
task," the American Psychological
eas certainly touch on the juvenile
the New Hampshire affiliate of the
Association said in its letter to the
justice field," Runkel said. "He cer-
Moral Majority, generated contro-
committee chairman, Sen. Joseph
tainly doesn't have experience in
versy in 1983 when he was accused
R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) "His creden-
locking kids up, but he may have rel-
of seeking to set up a "New Right
tials in the juvenile justice field are
evant experience in trying to keep
think tank" at the Education De-
simply nonexistent."
them on the straight and narrow."
Photo Copy Preservation
partment.
Reps. Augustus F. Hawkins (D-
The juvenile justice office was
Former education secretary T.H.
Calif.), chairman of the Education
the subject of controversy during
Bell wrote in his memoirs that he
and Labor Committee, and Dale E.
the Reagan years with the appoint-
demanded Sweet's removal follow-
Kildee (D-Mich.), chairman of the
ment of Alfred S. Regnery, a Justice
ing "horror tales" of his efforts, as
human resources subcommittee,
Department lawyer whose car bore
deputy director of the National In-
also called on the Judiciary Commit-
a bumper sticking asking, "Have
stitute of Education (NIE), to un-
tee to reject Sweet.
You Slugged Your Kid Today?"
dermine Bell's choice as director.
"An examination of Mr. Sweet's
Regnery, who was the target of
When Sweet obtained a new job
professional background reveals ex-
similar criticisms about his lack of
as executive director of the Nation-
perience in teaching, sales, person-
experience, approved a $734,000
al Council on Educational Research,
nel management, sign fabrica-
grant to an American University re-
an advisory group for NIE, he
tion/installation, and federal policy
searcher to perform a "content
sought to use the new position to
development and administration
analysis" of Playboy and Penthouse
seize control of the institute, ac-
with an exclusive focus on educa-
magazines, and a $186,000 con-
cording to Bell.
tion and disability issues," they
tract to a prominent conservative
At the Education Department,
wrote in a Nov. 15 letter. "Signif-
activist to prepare a course for high
Sweet-who complained to Educa-
icantly, Mr. Sweet does not possess
school students on the Constitution.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
05. Letter
From Dick Thornburgh to John Sununu
6/21/89
(b)(6)
Re: Recommendation for Deputy Attorney General (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Bordon J. Humphrey
United States Senator
New Hampshire
June 23, 1989
Dear Colleague:
As you know, the Justice Department has advocated the
nomination of Mr. Robert Fiske, Jr., to the post of Deputy
Attorney General, the number two spot at the Department. So
far, the White House, has not made a nomination, apparently
out of concern that some Republican senators oppose the
candidate. This week, the Justice Department has undertaken
a lobbying campaign in the Senate.
The purpose of my letter is to succinctly lay out the
arguments against such a nomination. I do not question the
candidate's professional competence or his character. My
concerns center on the conduct of the ABA's Standing
Committee on Federal Judiciary during Mr. Fiske's
chairmanship, and on the $1,000 campaign contribution Mr.
Fiske gave to a Democrat running for the U. S. Senate seat in
Vermont in 1988.
Mr. Fiske chaired the ABA Committee on judicial
selection from August, 1984 to August, 1987. There are two
fundamental complaints. First, the Committee divulged to an
outside group the names of persons under consideration for
nomination, violating the confidential basis under which the
names were provided the ABA by the Justice Department.
Second, the Committee at least in some cases showed a bias
against conservative candidates.
During Mr. Fiske's chairmanship, the Committee began
divulging names to the Judicial Selection Project of the
Alliance for Justice. According to an Alliance document
(attached), the Judicial Selection Project ...will
coordinate the opposition from public interest groups to the
nominations during the confirmation process in the Senate."
Obviously, the ABA Committee was not merely divulging names
to a fact-finding organization that would discreetly comment
to the ABA; instead the ABA was divulging names to an
organization publicly committed to coordinating opposition to
those nominees it found unacceptable according to its liberal
standards.
Further, the Judicial Selection Project was working with
Democrats on the Judiciary Committee. The attached document
states, "Second, the presence of the project [Judicial
Selection Project] has already energized some of the minority
members [Judiciary Committee Democrats] and their staffs.
For example, Susan Liss, the project director, has been
working with them [Judiciary Committee Democrats] in drafting
an extensive questionnaire to send to nominees Clearly,
the Project, to which the ABA Committee was divulging
Page Two
June 23, 1989
confidential lists of names, was not exactly a neutral,
objective participant in the process.
The membership of the Alliance reveals its ideological
imbalance. Some of its members are (full list attached):
National Education Association; Children's Defense Fund;
National Organization for Women Legal Defense and Education
Fund; Center for Law and Social Policy; and New York Lawyers
for the Public Interest. Not surprisingly, the Alliance for
Justice submitted testimony strongly opposing Robert Bork's
nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Mr. Fiske now acknowledges the divulging of names was a
"mistake." However, Mr. Fiske never questioned the practice
until conservative organizations asked the Committee for
access to names on the same basis as enjoyed by the liberal
Judicial Selection Project. Ten weeks after the request, Mr.
Fiske discontinued the practice, explaining that the
Department of Justice "provides us with the names on a
confidential basis." It is odd that Mr. Fiske, with his
experience as a U. S. Attorney and practicing lawyer, somehow
overlooked the impropriety of the arrangement with the
Judicial Selection Project, made under his chairmanship, and
only discovered the impropriety when conservative groups
asked for the same arrangement.
Here are examples which I believe show bias by the ABA
Committee against Reagan Administration candidates for
nomination and actual nominees.
1. In 1985, Professor Lino Graglia, a distinguished
Professor of Law at University of Texas Law School, was a
candidate for a vacancy on the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals. The Judicial Selection Project targeted Graglia for
defeat even before he was nominated (Congressional Quarterly,
9/7/85, p 1763), because of his writings criticizing Supreme
Court decisions on forced busing. The ABA Committee under
Mr. Fiske gave this well-qualified candidate a negative
rating and the Reagan Administration decided not to offer the
nomination.
2. Also in 1985, President Reagan was prepared to
nominate Professor William Harvey of University of Indiana
Law School for the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Professor Harvey, a former dean, is the author of a treatise
on federal practice, a distinguished constitutional scholar,
and an experienced and successful litigator as well. In 1982,
Professor Harvey served as Chairman of the Legal Services
Board, where he sought to eliminate certain grant programs by
Page Three
June 23, 1989
which the ABA's Fund for Public Education had benefitted to
the extent of $485,000.
The ABA assigned Mr. Steven Keane to investigate
Professor Harvey. Mr. Keane had been active in raising money
for the ABA Fund. Mr. Keane's fund-raising responsibilities
did not include seeking federal grants; nonetheless, his
involvement in raising money for the ABA's Fund for Public
Education created a conflict of interest between his role as
fund-raiser and his role as impartial evaluator of Professor
Harvey. The ABA Committee gave Professor Harvey a
preliminary rating of "not qualified", and the Administration
declined to nominate. Thus, another nominee who shared
President Reagan's judicial philosophy was blocked through
improper conduct by the ABA. To be sure, Mr. Keane was the
investigator assigned to the Seventh Circuit, but because of
the conflict of interest he should have been replaced.
3. In 1986, President Reagan nominated Judge J. Kenneth
Porter for the United States District Court in Tennessee.
Judge Porter, a seasoned and highly-respected state court
judge and former President of the Tennessee Trial Judges
Association, was at first rated qualified, unanimously, by
the ABA Committee. However, after the Alliance for Justice
circulated criticisms that Judge Porter was too prosecution-
oriented, the ABA Committee conducted a second evaluation.
Despite overwhelming support for Judge Porter from leading
figures of the Tennessee bench and bar, those who knew him
best, the ABA Committee under Mr. Fiske reversed itself and
unanimously changed Judge Porter's rating to not qualified.
And there were others: In a speech given on October 19,
1988, Nan Aron of the Alliance for Justice proudly proclaimed
how "we were able to convince the ABA with respect to William
Harvey, Michael Horowitz, lots and lots of people whose names
were never submitted to the [Senate Judiciary] Committee,
that these individuals were unqualified. We were lucky in
that we got the names of the nominees from the ABA directly."
I respectfully suggest we ought to hold Mr. Fiske
accountable for the improprieties which occurred during his
tenure as chairman; we should not reward him with one of the
most important positions in the government.
Mr. Fiske's defenders point to his support of Judge
Bork. This is knocking down a straw man. No one has
suggested Mr. Fiske opposed Judge Bork. It's interesting to
note, however, that when asked by Senator Biden to comment on
the four ABA Committee members who found Judge Bork not
qualified to serve on the Supreme Court, Mr. Fiske replied
Page Four
June 23, 1989
they "were conscientious and acted in good faith." Given an
opportunity to criticize the obvious ideological bias of
Judge Bork's ABA detractors, Mr. Fiske instead let them off
the hook.
Since this letter is directed only to Republican members
of the Senate, I cite the $1000 contribution from Mr. Fiske
to the Democratic candidate for U. S. Senate in Vermont, in
1988. At a time when all of us and thousands of our
supporters across the country were struggling to gain every
last possible seat in order to advance towards the goal of a
Republican majority, Mr. Fiske subordinated his loyalty to
our party and aided the other. It is true Mr. Fiske
earmarked his checks for the primary. But the Democrat
candidate never had a primary opponent, a fact Mr. Fiske must
have known when he wrote his second $500 check a full month
after the filing deadline for candidates had passed. Thus,
Mr. Fiske's $1000 was used against our nominee. One has to
conclude Mr. Fiske is either politically naive or
politically indifferent. In either case, I submit, there are
candidates better suited for the post of Deputy Attorney
General.
Finally, Carol Crawford, Assistant Attorney General for
Congressional Relations, in seeking to allay the concerns of
Mr. Fiske's opponents, assures senators that Mr. Fiske would
not be involved in judicial selection. This is preposter-
ous. No one should ask the Deputy Attorney General to recuse
himself from participation in judicial selection. For the
Department to suggest that Mr. Fiske should not participate,
or would not participate, only underscores the concerns of
those who find they must oppose him.
Sincerely,
Gordon J. Humphrey, USS
Encls.
IOI
stice
you
A National Association of Organizations Working for Equal Justice
NAM ARON
Executive Director
WILLIAM L TAYLOR
Chair
MEMBERS
Business - Protectional
People for the Provide interest
Judicial Selection Project
Canser for Law and
Some Postry
Canter - - - the
Packs imareat
Career her Nacional
SUMMARY
POINCY Remair
Conter for Science
in the Public interset
The Judicial Selection Project was organized
Consumers Union
under the auspices of the Alliance for Justice by
Education Law Camer
a group of individuals affiliated with leading
Employment Law Center
public interest, civil rights, labor and women's
Environmental Defense Fund
rights organizations. The project will monitor
Some Rights Advecases
candidates for vacancies on the federal judiciary,
Fees Research and
and will provide an independent review of nominees'
Assess Center
records on a number of issues important to the
Harmon & Waves
public interest. These issues include the
Instruce for Public
nominees' views on access to the courts, their
Representation
records of equity and fairness, and their commit-
Juverite - Center
ment to equal justice.
Mental Health Law Project
National Education Association
The current administration has indicated that
NOW Lagor Date
and
ideology, rather than merit, is likely to form
Educamen Fund
the basis of selection of judges for the next
Namenal Federation
four year. For example, the 1984 Republican
National Washer $ Law Canter
Party convention passed a resolution in its plat-
Native American Rights Fund
form to nominate to the Federal bench only those
Natural Resources Detense
individuals opposed to abortion, and who have a
Council
commitment to judicial restraint. In addition,
No. York Lawyers for me
the Reagan Administration has abandoned a set of
PUDIC Interest
reforms instituted by the previous administration
PUDIC Advocates. inc
which emphasized merit selection independent of
Starra Cwo Lagar
Detense Fund
ideology as a primary criterion for judicial
selection.
Women D - Project
Women $ Legal Defense Fund
These developments are all the more ominous in
light of the fact that President Reagan will have
the opportunity over the next four years to fill
approximately 265 seats on federal courts across
the country. Currently, there are 105 vacancies
waiting to be filled.
The project will have several different
components. Working with a grassroots network of
civic and bar groups, the project will collect infor:
tion about potential candidates for the federal
bench, decide which ones to evaluate, and investigat
Mailing address. 500 New Jersey Avenue NW Washing
2
selected candidates' records to assess their commitment to equa
justice and fairness. The project will share the information
collected with administration officials, the American Bar
Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary and, up
request, with the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Working with law professors and practitioners, the project
will also develop standards for the appointment of federal
judges. It plans to sponsor a conference shortly and invite
scholars and interested individuals to discuss appropriate
standards for judicial selection. The conference will also foc
on the appropriate role of the Senate in the judicial selection
process.
Our purpose is to encourage broader citizen participation
judicial selection, to promote the appointment of judges who wi
be independent and nonpartisan, and to make the judiciary more
broadly representative of the diverse segments of society. We
also will educate the public about the importance of the federa
courts in our political system.
Because of the immediate need for this project, Susan Liss
a lawyer with broad experience in public interest work, has bee
hired as Director, and a screening committee has been
organized. Ms. Liss has already begun reviewing those candidat
whose names have been made public by the administration and
setting in place a network of state and local contact groups.
The project will concentrate its efforts on candidates
nominated to the District Courts and Courts of Appeals. Althou
most public attention has been focused on possible Supreme Cour
nominees, intervention at the trial and appellate court levels
essential. This is due to the large number of vacancies at the
levels and the crucial role played by these courts in the feder
judicial scheme. of course, should a vacancy occur on the Supreme
Court, the project will coordinate with other groups, including
the recently-established Supreme Court Watch, in evaluating nominee
Many leaders in the public interest community fear that
without this project, judicial appointments will be made with
little public awareness or participation. The only independent
review of a candidate's qualifications is performed by the ABA
Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. That review is
conducted in secret, within a narrow framework, focusing solely
on a candidate's professional competence. The evaluation
performed by the Judicial Selection Project will be broader,
taking into account the candidates' competence as well as their
records of demonstrated commitment to equal justice, fairness
and equity.
3
Not only will the project be able to affect directly 1
number of nominations, but we believe its presence will send 1
clear signal to the administration that the public is closely
watching its selection process. One expert has written that
the Reagan Administration has been the most systematic in its
ideological screening of candidates since the Roosevelt admin-
istration. Our project will attempt to challenge the erosion
of judicial independance and encourage the appointment of judg
who value the basic tenets of our legal system, and who have
a respect for individual rights and equal justice. Even in th
current climate, with the President's party in the majority in
the Senate, the project can have a significant impact on judic
appointments over the next several years. In fact, early
indications are that the project has already begun to fill a
void that currently exists.
First, the ABA evaluation is a critical step in the judi
selection process. Candidates who are found deficient by the
Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary are frequently wit
drawn by the administration before the confirmation process
commences in the Senate. Members of the ABA Committee have
welcomed the establishment of the project, and indicated a str
desire to establish a close working relationship with it.
Second, the presence of the project has already. energize
some of the minority members of the Senate Judiciary Committee
and their staffs. For example, Susan Liss, the project direct
has been working with them in drafting an extensive questionna
to send to nominees that will request information about their
experience and views on a number of issues. Currently, only t
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee circulate a questionnai
which is not particularly useful because it seeks only limited
information and because a substantial portion of the responses
are confidential. Thus, the minority questionnaire will provi
both the Committee and the public with more complete data from
which to analyze a nominee's record.
The project already has begun to evaluate judicial candi-
dates. In early February, the Steering Committee met and decide
to focus on four of the thirty four candidates under active con-
sideration. They are Samuel Currin, for the District Court seat
in North Carolina; Frank Easterbrook and William Harvey for two
seats on the Seventh Circuit; and Alex Kozinzki for a seat on t'
Ninth Circuit. The project director is gathering information
about the candidates and will provide the information collected
to the ABA Standing Committee. Should any of the candidates be
nominated, the project will coordinate opposition from public
interest groups to the nominations during the confirmation proc
in the Senate.
LIST OF ALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE MEMBERS
Advocates for the Public Interest
Business and Professional People for the Public Interest
Center for Law and Social Policy
Center for Law in the Public Interest
Center for Public Representation
Center for Science in the Public Interest
Children's Defense Fund
Consumers Union
Education Law Center
Employment Law Center
Equal Rights Advocates
Food Research and Action Center
Harmon and Weiss
Institute for Public Representation
Juvenile Law Center of Philadelphia
Mental Health Law Project
National Education Association
NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund
National Wildlife Federation
National Women's Law Center
Native American Rights Fund
Natural Resources Defense Council
New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Public Advocates, INC.
Roisman, Reno and Cavanaugh
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
Women's Law Project
Women's Legal Defense Fund
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE:
FROM THE PRESIDENT
To: Bob Fishes
GB GR HANDWRITING PHOTOCOPY
Sen. Thurmond
1
Desk
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
06. Memo
From Fred McClure to POTUS
6/26/89
(b)(6)
Re: Meeting w/Senator Strom Thurmond on Nomination (2
pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would-violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
817 Federal Building
231 W. Lafayette
Detroit, Michigan 48226
Senator Strom Thurmond
United States Senate
Washington D.C. 20530
Dear Senator Thurmond:
I hope that everything is well with you. This is to share some brief
thoughts on Robert Fiske, currently under consideration for Deputy
Attorney General, which I have already shared with Duke Short.
During my tenure as Assistant Attorney General for Legal Policy, I
had considerable opportunity to work closely with Mr. Fiske who was
then serving as Chairman of the American Bar Association's Standing
Committee on the Federal Judiciary. While I have long believed that
legitimate questions could be raised about the nature of the ABA's
involvement in the federal judicial selection process, I do not
think that it would be appropriate to attribute any defects in
this process to Mr. Fiske. In my experience over several years,
Mr. Fiske was invariably conscientious and fair in his role as
Chairman.
Despite natural disagreements from time to time with individual
evaluations reached by the Committee, I never felt that Mr. Fiske
accorded the judicial candidates of President Reagan anything less
than impartial and balanced consideration. At no time did I have
any sense that he was predisposed in any way against the candidates
of the Administration on the basis of judicial philosophy or poli-
tical background; when concerns were raised about a temporary ABA
practice of regularly submitting the names of potential candidates
to outside organizations that were not generally in accord with
President Reagan's judicial philosophy, Mr. Fiske was sensitive
to those concerns and responded to eliminate this practice.
I would respectfully urge you to separate your concerns about the
ABA's judicial selection role (some of which are currently being
addressed by the Judiciary Committee and the Justice Department)
from those of Mr. Fiske's credentials to be Deputy Attorney Gene-
ral. He is a respected attorney, an individual of integrity and
served his country honorably as Chairman of the ABA's Committee.
In particular, I believe that it would be wrong to lay blame on
Mr. Fiske for several instances of questionable conduct on the
part of committee members, e.g. religious inquiries. The Commit-
tee is a highly decentralized body and its members are not sub-
ject to effective control by the Chairman. Whenever inappro-
priate conduct was called to Mr. Fiske's attention, it was again
my experience that he was responsive and acted to prevent recur-
rence of these matters.
Thank you for your consideration of these thoughts.
Best in everything,
Steve Markman
Stephen Markman
ID# 047059
THE WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
INCOMING
DATE RECEIVED: JUNE 22, 1989
NAME OF CORRESPONDENT: THE HONORABLE RICHARD THORNBURGH
SUBJECT: FORWARDS COPY OF A LETTER FROM STEVE MARKMAN
REGARDING ROBERT FISKE
ACTION
DISPOSITION
ROUTE TO:
ACT DATE TYPE C COMPLETED
OFFICE/AGENCY
(STAFF NAME)
CODE YY/MM/DD RESP D YY/MM/DD
JOHN SUNUNU
ORG 89/06/22
/ /
REFERRAL NOTE:
/ /
/ /
REFERRAL NOTE:
/ /
/ 7
REFERRAL NOTE:
/ /
7 /
REFERRAL NOTE:
/ /
/
/
REFERRAL NOTE:
COMMENTS:
ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENTS:
MEDIA:L INDIVIDUAL CODES:
CS MAIL
USER CODES: (A)
(B)
(C)
*ACTION CODES:
*DISPOSITION
*OUTGOING
*
*
*
*CORRESPONDENCE:
*
*A-APPROPRIATE ACTION
*A-ANSWERED
*TYPE RESP=INITIALS
*
*C-COMMENT/RECOM
*B-NON-SPEC-REFERRAL
*
OF SIGNER
*
*D-DRAFT RESPONSE
*C-COMPLETED
*
CODE = A
*
*F-FURNISH FACT SHEET
*S-SUSPENDED
*COMPLETED = DATE OF
*
*I-INFO COPY/NO ACT NEC*
*
OUTGOING
*
*R-DIRECT REPLY W/COPY *
*
*
*S-FOR-SIGNATURE
*
*
*
*X-INTERIM REPLY
*
*
*
REFER QUESTIONS AND ROUTING UPDATES TO CENTRAL REFERENCE
(ROOM 75,OEOB) EXT-2590
KEEP THIS WORKSHEET ATTACHED TO THE ORIGINAL INCOMING
LETTER AT ALL TIMES AND SEND COMPLETED RECORD TO RECORDS
MANAGEMENT.
P02
19.
90
11:33
AM
Hnited States Senate
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
June 14, 1989
The Honorable George Bush
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
We understand that Robert Fiske, Jr., former Chairman of
the Amercan Bar Association Standing Committee on Federal
Judiciary, remains under consideration for nomination as
Deputy Attorney General and that a decision on this
nomination may be imminent.
We have serious concerns regarding this potential
nomination. Our primary concern is based upon Mr. Fiske's
role as Chairman of the ABA Committee during the period of
1985 to 1987, during which time the ABA Committee improperly
applied ideological criteria to thwart the nominations of
various well-qualified candidates whom President Reagan
proposed to nominate to important federal judgeships. More
significantly, the Committee, under Mr. Fiske, leaked to
liberal organizations the names of persons under
consideration by the Reagan Administration and whose names
were provided the ABA on a confidential basis. Such leaks
permitted groups opposed to the President's judicial
philosophy to attack the candidates and prevent their
nomination.
Our doubts about Mr. Fiske's commitment to our party's
philsophy are further reenforced by the fact that he contri-
buted money to a Democratic Senatorial candidate in the
crucial 1988 elections. Mr. Fiske gave $1,000 to the
campaign of Democratic candidate William Gray, who was
seeking to capture Bob Stafford's seat in Vermont. While it
is true, Mr. Fiske earmarked his two $500 checks for the
primary, Mr. Gray never had a primary opponent, a fact Mr.
Fiske had to know, since the date of his second check
followed the filing deadline by a full month. Since control
of the Senate was up for grabs in the 1988 election, and
every seat was crucial, Mr. Fiske's financial support of a
Democratic candidate raises legitimate questions as to his
commitment to the policies of a Republican Administration.
P04
04. 19. 90 11:33 AM
Honorable George Bush
June 14, 1989
Page Two
Mr. President, it does not appear that Mr. Fiske shares
the basic approach to matters of legal and judicial policy
which you so effectively articulated in your winning campaign
for President. We therefore respectfully urge you to
reconsider this matter and select a nominee with a demon-
strated commitment to your principles, and those of the
Republican platform, in these important areas.
Sincerely,
Walcoln RitBond Wally
Stan Symms
Dan Coats
Chuck Lasslay
Jesse Helms
Ment Lott
m Clare
strom Thurmond
Came Mach
Bin analing Thod Column
THS COPY 6/15/89 SENT
GORDON J. HUMPHREY
COMMITTEES
NEW HAMPSHIRE
JUDICIARY
FOREIGN RELATIONS
531 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
(202) 224-2841
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC
FAX NUMBER
United States Senate
WORKS
(202) 224-1353
NEW HAMPSHIRE TOLL FREE NUMBER
1-800-852-3714
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
June 26, 1989
Honorable Strom Thurmond
Ranking Minority Member
Senate Judiciary Committee
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Strom:
As you know, the Justice Department has advocated the
nomination of Mr. Robert Fiske, Jr., to the post of Deputy
Attorney General. The purpose of my letter is to succinctly
lay out the arguments against such a nomination. My concerns
center on the conduct of the ABA's Standing Committee on
Judicial Selection during Mr. Fiske's chairmanship, and on
the $1,000 campaign contribution Mr. Fiske gave to a Democrat
running for the U. S. Senate seat in Vermont in 1988.
Mr. Fiske chaired the ABA Committee from August, 1984 to
August, 1987. There are two fundamental complaints. First,
the Committee divulged to an outside group the names of
persons under consideration for nomination, violating the
confidential basis under which the names were provided the
ABA by the Justice Department. Second, the Committee at
least in some cases showed a bias against conservative
candidates.
During Mr. Fiske's chairmanship, the Committee began
divulging names to the Judicial Selection Project of the
Alliance for Justice. According to an Alliance document
(attached), the Judicial Selection Project "
will
coordinate the opposition from public interest groups to the
ominations during the confirmation process in the Senate."
Obviously, the ABA Committee was not merely divulging names
to a fact-finding organization that would discreetly comment
to the ABA; instead the ABA was divulging names to an
organization publicly committed to coordinating opposition to
those nominees it found unacceptable according to its liberal
standards.
Further, the Judicial Selection Project was working with
Democrats on the Judiciary Committee. The attached document
states, "Second, the presence of the project [Judicial
Selection Project] has already energized some of the minority
members [Judiciary Committee Democrats] and their staffs.
For example, Susan Liss, the project director, has been
working with them [Judiciary Committee Democrats] in drafting
ONE EAGLE SQUARE
157 MAIN STREET
CONCORD, NH 03301
BERLIN, NH 03570
(603) 228-0453
(603) 752-2600
an extensive questionnaire to send to nominees
Clearly,
the Project, to which the ABA Committee was divulging
confidential lists of names, was not exactly a neutral,
objective participant in the process.
The membership of the Alliance reveals its ideological
imbalance. Some of members are : National Education
Association; Children's Defense Fund; National Organization
for Women Legal Defense and Education Fund; Center for Law
and Social Policy; and New York Lawyers for the Public
Interest. Not surprisingly, the Alliance for Justice
submitted testimony strongly opposing Robert Bork.
Mr. Fiske now acknowleges the divulging of names was a
"mistake." However, Mr. Fiske never questioned the practice
until conservative organizations asked the Committee for
access to names on the same basis as enjoyed by the liberal
Judical Selection Project. Ten weeks after the request, Mr.
Fiske discontinued the practice, explaining the Department of
Justice "provides us with the names on a confidential
basis. It is odd that Mr. Fiske, with his experience as a
U. S. Attorney and practicing lawyer, somehow overlooked the
impropriety of the arrangement with the Judicial Selection
Project, made under his chairmanship, and only discovered the
impropriety when conservative groups asked for the same
arrangement.
Here are examples which I believe show bias by the ABA
Committee against Reagan Administration candidates for
nomination and actual nominees.
1. In 1985, Professor Lino Graglia, a distinguished
Professor of Law at University of Texas Law School, was a
candidate for a vacancy on the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals. The Judicial Selection Project targeted Graglia for
defeat even before he was nominated (Congressional Quarterly,
9/7/85, p 1763), because of his writings criticizing Supreme
Court decisions on forced busing. The ABA Committee under
Mr. Fiske rated this well-qualified candidate as not
qualified and the Reagan Administration decided not to offer
the nomination.
2. Also in 1985, President Reagan was prepared to
nominate Professor William Harvey of University of Indiana
Law School for the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Professor Harvey, a former dean, is the author of a treatise
on federal practice, a distinguished constitutional scholar,
and an experienced and successful litigator as well. In 1982,
Professor Harvey served as Chairman of the Legal Services
Board, where he sought to eliminate certain grant programs by
which the ABA's Fund for Public Education had benefited to
the extent of $485,000.
The ABA assigned Mr. Steven Keane to investigate
Professor Harvey. Mr Keane had been active in raising money
for the ABA Fund. Mr. Keane's fund-raising responsibilities
did not include seeking federal grants; nonetheless, his
involvement in raising money for the ABA's Fund for Public
Education created a clear conflict of interest between his
role as fund-raiser and his role as impartial evaluator of
Professor Harvey. The ABA Committee gave Proffesor Harvey a
rating of "not qualified", and the Administration declined to
nominate. Thus, another nominee who shared President
Reagan's judicial philosophy was blocked through improper
conduct of the ABA. To be sure, Mr. Keane was the
investigator assigned to the Seventh Circuit, but because of
the conflict of interest he should have been replaced.
3. In 1986, President Reagan nominated Judge J. Kenneth
Porter for the United States District Court in Tennessee.
Judge Porter, a seasoned and highly-respected state court
judge and former President of the Tennessee Trial Judges
Association, was at first rated qualified, unanimously, by
the ABA Committee. However, after the Alliance for Justice
circulated criticisms that Judge Porter was too prosecution
oriented, the ABA Committee conducted a second evaluation.
Despite overwhelming support for Judge Porter from leading
figures of the Tennessee bench and bar, those who knew him
best, the ABA Committee under Mr. Fiske reversed itself and
unanimously changed Judge Porter's rating to not qualified.
And there were others. In a speech given on October 19,
1988, Nan Aron of the Alliance for Justice proudly proclaimed
how "we were able to convince the ABA with respect to William
Harvey, Michael Horowitz, lots and lots of people whose names
were never submitted to the [Senate Judiciary] Committee,
that these individuals were unqualified. We were lucky in
that we got the names of the nominees from the ABA directly."
I respectfully suggest we ought to hold Mr. Fiske
accountable for the improprieties which occured during his
tenure as chairman; we should not reward him with one of the
most important positions in the government.
Mr. Fiske's defenders point to his support of Judge
Bork. This is knocking down a straw man. No one has
suggested Mr. Fiske opposed Judge Bork. Instead, as oulined,
my concerns center on leaking confidential lists of names to
a liberal organization which succeeded in blocking a number
of President Reagan's candidates, on the bias which the ABA
Committee itself exhibited, and on the political matter
below.
I cite the $1,000 contribution from Mr. Fiske to the
Democrat candidate for U. S. Senate in Vermont, in 1988. At
a time when all of us and thousands of our supporters across
the country were struggling to gain every last possible seat
in order to advance towards the goal of a Republican
majority, Mr. Fiske subordinated his loyalty to our party and
aided the other. It is true Mr. Fiske earmarked his checks
for the primary. But the Democrat candidate never had a
primary opponent, a fact Mr. Fiske must have known when he
wrote his second $500 check a full month after the filing
deadline for candidates had passed. Thus, Mr. Fiske's $1000
was used against our nominee. One has to conclude Mr. Fiske
is either politically naive or politically indifferent. In
either case, I submit, there are candidates better suited for
the post of Deputy Attorney General.
Finally, Carol Crawford, Assistant Attorney General for
Congressional Relations, in seeking to allay the concerns of
Mr. Fiske's opponents, assures senators that Mr. Fiske would
not be involved in judicial selection. This is
preposterous. No one should ask the Deputy Attorney General
to recuse himself from participation in judicial selection.
For the Department to suggest that Mr. Fiske should not
participate or would not participate, only underscores the
concerns of those who find they must oppose him.
I hope you can prevail upon the Justice Department to
select another candidate. There is no doubt the Democrats
would gladly confirm Mr. Fiske, but I and a number of
Republicans are not prepared to acquiesce quietly.
Sincerely,
Gordon Humphrey
stice
A National Association of Organizations Working for Equal Justice
NAM ARON
Executive Director
WILLIAM L TAYLOR
2
MEMBERS
- Protectioner
Proper for the Public interest
Judicial Selection Project
Camer for Law -
Seenes Possery
Canser - - . the
Pucks yearself
SUMMARY
Career - Nacional
POINCY Aprilar
Canser for Science
in the Public interest
The Judicial Selection Project was organized
Consumers Union
under the auspices of the Alliance for Justice by
Education Law Center
a group of individuals affiliated with leading
Employment Law Correr
public interest, civil rights, labor and wcmen's
Environments Delense Fune
rights organizations. The project will monitor
candidates for vacancies on the federal judiciary,
- Regist Advections
and will provide an independent review of nominees'
1 1 I
Assoca Cantor
records on a number of issues important to the
Harman & Was
public interest. These issues include the
instruce for Public
nominees' views on access to the courts, their
Representation
records of equity and fairness, and their commit-
Juverate - Conter
ment to equal justice.
Mental Health LBW Project
National Education ASSOCIATION
The current administration has indicated that
NOW Lagar Date
and
ideology, rather than merit, is likely to form
Insuration Pune
the basis of selection of judges for the next
Name Which Facaration
four year. For example, the 1984 Republican
Namenal - $ Law Career
Party convention passed a resolution in its plat-
Name American Rights Fund
form to nominate to the Federal bench only those
individuals opposed to abortion, and who have a
Natural Resources Defense
Council
commitment to judicial restraint. In addition,
No - von Lawyers for -
the Reagan Administration has abandoned a set of
Public Interest
reforms instituted by the previous administration
Public inc
which emphasized merit selection independent of
Serva Cho Legal
ideology as a primary criterion for judicial
Determs Fund
selection.
Women , Lgw Project
Women a Legal Determs Fune
These developments are all the more ominous in
light of the fact that President Reagan will have
the opportunity over the next four years to fill
approximately 265 seats on federal courts across
the country. Currently, there are 105 vacancies
waiting to be filled.
The project will have several different
components. Working with a grassroots network of
civic and bar groups, the project will collect infor:
tion about potential candidates for the federal
bench, decide which ones to evaluate, and investigat
Marling address. 500 New Jersey Avenue NW Washing
selected candidates' records to assess their commitment CO eque
justice and fairness. The project will share the information
collected with administration officials, the American Bar
Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary and, up
request, with the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Working with law professors and practitioners, the project
will also develop standards for the appointment of federal
judges. It plans to sponsor a conference shortly and invite
scholars and interested individuals to discuss appropriate
standards for judicial selection. The conference will also foc
on the appropriate role of the Senate in the judicial selection
process.
Our purpose is to encourage broader citizen participation
judicial selection, to promote the appointment of judges who wi
be independent and nonpartisan, and to make the judiciary more
broadly representative of the diverse segments of society. We
also will educate the public about the importance of the federa
courts in our political system.
Because of the immediate need for this project, Susan Liss
a lawyer with broad experience in public interest work, has bee
hired as Director, and a screening committee has been
organized. Ms. Liss has already begun reviewing those candidat
whose names have been made public by the administration and
setting in place a network of state and local contact groups.
The project will concentrate its efforts on candidates
nominated to the District Courts and Courts of Appeals. Althou
most public attention has been focused on possible Supreme Cour
nominees, intervention at the trial and appellate court levels
essential. This is due to the large number of vacancies at the
levels and the crucial role played by these courts in the feder
judicial scheme. of course, should a vacancy occur on the Supreme
Court, the project will coordinate with other groups, including
the recently-established Supreme Court Watch, in evaluating nominee
Many leaders in the public interest community fear that
without this project, judicial appointments will be made with
little public awareness or participation. The only independent
review of a candidate's qualifications is performed by the ABA
Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. That review is
conducted in secret, within a narrow framework, focusing solely
on a candidate's professional competence. The evaluation
performed by the Judicial Selection Project will be broader,
taking into account the candidates' competence as well as their
records of demonstrated commitment to equal justice, fairness
and equity.
Not only will the project be able to affect directly 1
number of nominations, but we believe its presence will send a
clear signal to the administration that the public is closely
watching its selection process. One expert has written that
the Reagan Administration has been the most systematic in its
ideological screening of candidates since the Roosevelt admin-
istration. Our project will attempt to challenge the erosion
of judicial independance and encourage the appointment of judg
who value the basic tenets of our legal system, and who have
a respect for individual rights and equal justice. Even in th
current climate, with the President's party in the majority in
the Senate, the project can have a significant impact on judic
appointments over the next several years. In fact, early
indications are that the project has already begun to fill a
void that currently exists.
First, the ABA evaluation is a critical step in the judi
selection process. Candidates who are found deficient by the
Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary are frequently wit
drawn by the administration before the confirmation process
commences in the Senate. Members of the ABA Committee have
welcomed the establishment of the project, and indicated a str
desire to establish & close working relationship with it.
Second, the presence of the project has already. energize
some of the minority members of the Senate Judiciary Committee
and their staffs. For example, Susan Liss, the project direct
has been working with them in drafting an extensive questionna
to send to nominees that will request information about their
experience and views on a number of issues. Currently, only t
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee circulate a questionnai
which is, not particularly useful because it seeks only limited
information and because a substantial portion of the responses
are confidential. Thus, the minority questionnaire will provi
both the Committee and the public with more complete data from
which to analyze a nominee's record.
The project already has begun to evaluate judicial candi-
dates. In early February, the Steering Committee met and decide
to focus on four of the thirty four candidates under active con-
sideration. They are Samuel Currin, for the District Court seat
in North Carolina; Frank Easterbrook and William Harvey for two
seats on the Seventh Circuit; and Alex Kozinzki for a seat on =
Ninth Circuit. The project director is gathering information
about the candidates and will provide the information collected
to the ABA Standing Committee. Should any of the candidates be
nominated, the project will coordinate opposition from public
interest groups to the nominations during the confirmation proc'
in the Senate.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
07. Memo
Re: Nomination of Deputy Attorney General (2 pp.)
n.d.
(b)(6)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Personnel (2 of 2) (1990) [5]: Department of Justice Appointments
Date Closed:
12/11/2004
OA/ID Number:
29165-010
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., DELAWARE, CHAIRMAN
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, MASSACHUSETTS
STROM THURMOND, SOUTH CAROLINA
HOWARD M. METZENBAUM, OHIO
ORRIN G. HATCH, UTAH
DENNIS DECONCINI, ARIZONA
ALAN K. SIMPSON, WYOMING
PATRICK J. LEAHY, VERMONT
CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, IOWA
HOWELL HEFLIN, ALABAMA
ARLEN SPECTER, PENNSYLVANIA
PAUL SIMON, ILLINOIS
GORDON J. HUMPHREY, NEW HAMPSHIRE
United States Senate
HERBERT KOHL, WISCONSIN
MARK H. GITENSTEIN, CHIEF COUNSEL
DIANA HUFFMAN, STAFF DIRECTOR
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
TERRY L. WOOTEN, MINORITY CHIEF COUNSEL
R.J. DUKE SHORT, MINORITY STAFF DIRECTOR
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-6275
June 13, 1989
The Honorable Strom Thurmond
Senate Judiciary Committee
Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Strom:
As you know, I have serious objections to the nomination
of Robert Fiske, Jr. as Deputy Attorney General. I will
briefly outline my concerns, which I know you share.
First, Mr. Fiske, as chairman of the American Bar
Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, was
involved in the Committee's application of ideological criteria
to obstruct the nominations of a number of well-qualified
judicial candidates proposed by President Reagan.
Second, the Committee, headed by Mr. Fiske, leaked the
names of possible nominees to liberal organizations. The names
of these potential nominees were provided to the ABA on a
confidential basis, and the leaks permitted opposition to the
individuals to gain ground, thus preventing certain
nominations.
Third, I question Mr. Fiske's committment to our party, as
evidenced by his contribution to a Democratic Senatorial
candidate, William Gray in Vermont.
As you well know, we need someone in the number two spot
at the Justice Department who shares our, and the President's,
basic approach to matters of legal and judicial policy. I'm
counting on you to convey our mutual opposition to the Attorney
General and, if necessary, to the President.
Sincerely,
Chuck
Charles E. Grassley
United States Senator