Judge Lamberth Says Judicial Nomination System Is Broken

S.A. native Royce C. Lamberth, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, , who spoke to the San Antonio Bar Association in February, returned to the Alamo City this weekend (he and his wife have family here).

The judge spoke at the Bar Association's Law Day luncheon (my thanks again to Burns & Black P.L.L.C. for sponsoring the table where I sat; one of the attorneys there gave James A. Rodriguez some tickets, and he brought me and another classmate).

With the impending retirement of Supreme Court Justice David Souter on lawyers' minds, Judge Lamberth spoke about how the judicial nomination process is broken:

• He said he was disgusted by how some politicians criticized nominees for the U.S. Attorney General's office positions because of clients they had represented.
• The judge noted that his confirmation in 1987 took six months; today there are some judicial nominees who have been waiting two or four years.
• He said these partisan attacks come from both sides of the aisle, and each side needs to acknowledge that the other side has a point about the partisanship.
• The judge said that the appointment of the most qualified candidates should be the goal of all Americans.
• He added that this country needs the best and brightest; judge who will set aside their personal views and apply the law and the Constitution.
• The judge said he's very impressed by President Obama's first three judicial nominations (to the Second, Fourth, and Seventh circuits).
• He acknowledged the tradition of senatorial courtesy in signing off on the president's judicial nominations, but said that tradition is not absolute.
• Judge Lamberth said that during the nomination hearings, special interest groups feed questions to their senators and attend the hearings to make sure the senators stick to the script.
• He noted that the federal judiciary now has more than sixty vacancies--and twenty-two of them are considered judicial emergencies because of the excessive workload placed on their fellow judges.
• He also mentioned one person unsuccessfully nominated to a judgeship during the Bush administration who asked the President not to resubmit her nomination because the process was so demeaning.

All in all, it was an interesting speech, and I hope Judge Lamberth comes back to town soon for another talk.

Prado's (Indirect) Response

Earlier, I mentioned a four-year-old movement to put Fifth Circuit Judge Ed Prado on the Supreme Court.

Today at the San Antonio Bar Association's Law Day luncheon, one of the speakers was Judge Prado, who took the podium to talk about San Antonio lawyer Gus Garcia, one of the litigators in Hernandez v. Texas, a key civil rights case.

As he stepped up to the microphone, the judge pulled out his cell phone. "Hello Mr. President. Yes, Mr. President. It would be an honor." The audience laughed as he ended the "phone call."

Judge Prado then told us that he had a better chance of singing with The Supremes than becoming one of the Supremes.

Prado for Supreme Court Justice?

With lawyers and policy wonks everywhere buzzing about the impending retirement of Supreme Court Justice David Souter, the big question is, who will replace him on the nation's highest court?

Right now, the leading candidates include Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor and Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm--but there are plenty of other names floating around.

However, there's also one local whose name has been discussed before: Fifth Circuit Judge Ed Prado.

Law Professor Orin Kerr notes over at the Volokh Conspiracy that four years ago a liberal group tried to get President Bush to nominate Judge Prado to the Supreme Court:

With the news that Justice Souter is retiring, and with thoughts turning to his possible successor, I'm reminded of the "independent grassroots campaign" -- headed by a group of liberal activists -- that received some attention in 2005 to urge the President to nominate Fifth Circuit Judge Ed Prado for the Supreme Court.

I admit I was dubious about the effort back in 2005. But I've been thinking about it a lot in last 4 years -- or at least in the last 4 minutes, since learning that Souter is going to retire -- and I think it's high time to take that campaign seriously.

Unfortunately, the old movement and Prof. Kerr's post both seem more like wishful thinking and trying to score political points than an actual desire to see Judge Prado move to Washington. Still, it would be nice if he ends up in the running.