ILNews

Senators still stalling judge's Circuit nomination

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indianapolis judge's potential elevation to the federal appeals bench remains controversial even as the full U.S. Senate inches closer to voting on his nomination in the next week.

As legislators prepared to confirm another federal judge's nomination Monday, Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he hopes to have a vote on U.S. Judge David F. Hamilton's move to the 7th Circuit on the morning of Nov. 16. Judge Hamilton currently sits on the Southern District of Indiana's bench as chief judge.

The Republican minority wants 30 hours of debate on the judge's nomination, according to Reid, who said Democratic leaders might be forced to cut debate in order to bring a vote to the full legislative body.

Reid said he hopes to reach an agreement with the Republicans on the $134 million military construction legislation. Those negotiations could impact the discussion on Judge Hamilton's vote, and Reid said it would be a shame to invoke the debate-ending procedural move known as cloture.

But it's important to hold confirmation votes for the judicial vacancies soon, before the Senate turns to the sweeping health-care reform legislation before leaving for its Thanksgiving break the following week, Reid said.

His office confirmed this morning that a cloture motion on Judge Hamilton's nomination would likely be filed today, before senators leave for a three-day Veteran's Day break.

Judge Hamilton has been on the District bench since 1994. If confirmed, he would succeed Circuit Judge Kenneth Ripple, who took senior status in September 2008.

President Barack Obama nominated Judge Hamilton in February - the new president's first judicial pick. Though the judge made it through the Senate Judicial Committee in June, he's faced five months of delay as Republican members used rules to hold up a vote before the full Senate.

Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., appeared before the Senate Monday and blasted Republicans for stalling action on Obama's judicial picks, noting that 10 judicial nominees are pending on the calendar and only a few have been confirmed at this point.

"The obstruction and delays in considering President Obama's judicial nominations is especially disappointing given the extensive efforts by President Obama to turn away from the divisive approach taken by the previous administration and to reach out to Senators from both parties as he selects mainstream, well-qualified nominees," Leahy said in a floor statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT