PDA

View Full Version : Obama's First Judicial Pick




LittleLightShining
03-17-2009, 01:24 PM
I was looking for something and came across this blog entry: Obama Makes First Judicial Pick (http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/3/17/125938/520)

By Jeralyn, Section Judiciary
Posted on Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 11:59:38 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

President Barack Obama has made his first judicial nomination (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/03/president_picks.html):

Announcing his first federal appeals court pick, President Obama today reached for a moderate who already has the bipartisan support of both of his home state's senators. If confirmed, federal Chief District Judge David Hamilton of Indiana will get a seat on the US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.

But, is he really a moderate? The radical right objects (http://www.lifenews.com/nat4920.html) to him on grounds he has issued pro-choice rulings and was a board member of the Indiana ACLU prior to becoming a federal judge.

The National Review (http://www.lifenews.com/nat4920.html) complains: [More...]

Or perhaps Hamilton’s inventive invocation of substantive due process to suppress evidence of a criminal defendant’s possession of cocaine, a ruling that, alas, was unanimously reversed by the Seventh Circuit?

People for the American Way praises the choice:

"David Hamilton is an ideal choice for this seat," said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way. "Throughout his career, he has demonstrated a willingness to put principle ahead of politics and bring an open mind to every case."

Law Prof Doug Berman at Sentencing Law and Policy (http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2009/03/here-comes-the-obama-judges-do-we-need-to-prepare-for-the-mass-freeing-of-criminal-defendants.html) has more and notes this ruling:

In 2008, Judge Hamilton struck down as unconstitutional an amendment to the state law requiring convicted sex offenders to provide the authorities with personal information, including any e-mail addresses or user names. The amendment would also have required the offenders to agree to allow their home computers to be searched at any time and to pay for a program to allow monitoring of their Internet use.

The judge said the amendment cut into the heart of a person’s right to privacy in his home. “The ability of the individual to retreat into his home and therefore to be free from unreasonable intrusion by the government stands at the very core” of constitutional protections against unreasonable searches, he said.

***********
I then did a quick search and found links to pdf's of recent opinions:http://www.insd.uscourts.gov/News/recent_opinions.htm#Chief_Judge_David_F._Hamilton

From the same site his bio:



Judge Hamilton was appointed United States District Judge for the Southern District of Indiana in 1994. Judge Hamilton previously was a partner at Barnes & Thornburg, a private law firm in Indianapolis. He served as Counsel to the Governor of Indiana from 1989 to 1991 and from 1984 to 1989 was an associate at Barnes & Thornburg.

Judge Hamilton grew up in Southern Indiana. He graduated from Haverford College in 1979 and Yale Law school in 1983. He also performed graduate work as a Fulbright Scholar at the University of Tuebingen in Germany. He served as law clerk to Judge Richard D. Cudahy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago and then returned to Indianapolis to practice law. He is a founding member of the Sagamore Inn of Court in the American Inns of Court. He served as a member of the Indiana State Recount Commission from 1986 to 1987 and as chairman of the Indiana State Ethics Commission from 1991 to 1994.

Mesogen
03-17-2009, 02:01 PM
This guy sounds pretty good to me.

paulitics
03-17-2009, 04:42 PM
This guy sounds pretty good to me.

yeah, me too.

Kludge
03-17-2009, 04:45 PM
Not much information there, but I'd take an ACLU member over some of a Neocon as a judge.

fedup100
03-17-2009, 05:48 PM
ACLU member :eek::eek:

Another joo, why not?

jack555
03-17-2009, 09:44 PM
This guy sounds pretty good to me.

me too so far

armslist
03-17-2009, 09:46 PM
I'd like to know his 2nd Amendment record. The ACLU won't touch firearm issues.

Toureg89
03-18-2009, 12:04 AM
not much information there, but i'd take an aclu member over some of a neocon as a judge.
qft

i'd like to know his 2nd amendment record. The aclu won't touch firearm issues.
qft

LittleLightShining
03-18-2009, 07:01 AM
I found this (http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjcyMmNjY2E4ZTYzMGRlZmM3NTQ5Zjc3OWU4NTdlMDU=):


Or maybe Hamilton’s extraordinary seven-year-long series of rulings obstructing Indiana’s implementation of its law providing for informed consent on abortion? That obstruction elicited this strong statement (emphasis added) from the Seventh Circuit panel majority that overturned Hamilton:


For seven years Indiana has been prevented from enforcing a statute materially identical to a law held valid by the Supreme Court in Casey, by this court in Karlin, and by the fifth circuit in Barnes. No court anywhere in the country (other than one district judge in Indiana ) has held any similar law invalid in the years since Casey. [I]Although Salerno does not foreclose all pre-enforcement challenges to abortion laws, it is an abuse of discretion for a district judge to issue a pre-enforcement injunction while the effects of the law (and reasons for those effects) are open to debate.

From this other article (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/18/obama-appoints-first-appellate-court-justice/):

In 2003, Hamilton struck down part of an Indiana law requiring abortion clinics to give women information about alternatives to abortion in the presence of a physician or nurse. The information had to be given to women 18 hours before the procedure, requiring them to make two visits to the doctor’s office to obtain the procedure. That decision was also overturned on appeal.

Here's another list of decisions (http://indianalawblog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=1&search=%22judge+hamilton%22). I'm not seeing a whole lot about second amendment cases but I did find one (http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2009/02/ind_decision_7t_3.html).

Dripping Rain
03-18-2009, 01:01 PM
I dont like this guy
he seems like an Anti-life activist and an abortion lobbyist. his affiliation with the Anti-life ACLU & his SIN Dawn Johnsen whos an assistant AG nominee all worked for the ACLU for a very long time lobbying for baby murder. according to wikipedia Dawn Johnsen who worked for the ACLU also worked for the National Abortion & Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL Pro-Choice America)
its weird how some people here all of a sudden like BHO's nomination of this guy. BHO is an Usurper & a 2 faced liar. All decent people were either driven out from his administration by AIPAC & ADL or they declined their nominations

jack555
03-18-2009, 01:22 PM
I dont like this guy
he seems like an Anti-life activist and an abortion lobbyist. his affiliation with the Anti-life ACLU & his SIN Dawn Johnsen whos an assistant AG nominee all worked for the ACLU for a very long time lobbying for baby murder. according to wikipedia Dawn Johnsen who worked for the ACLU also worked for the National Abortion & Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL Pro-Choice America)
its weird how some people here all of a sudden like BHO's nomination of this guy. BHO is an Usurper & a 2 faced liar. All decent people were either driven out from his administration by AIPAC & ADL or they declined their nominations


I would rather have a pro-choice judge that respects the constitution (hopefully he does seeing as he was part of the aclu) than a pro-choice judge that hates the constitution which is what i would expect from Barry.