Chamber of Commerce Intensifies Campaign Against Federal Judicial Nominee

[TomCADem]

Source: Law.com

As the Senate Judiciary Committee prepares to vote on John "Jack" McConnell Jr.'s nomination for a federal judgeship in the District of Rhode Island, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is stepping up its campaign to derail his appointment.

President Barack Obama nominated McConnell on March 10 for one of Rhode Island's three district judge slots. The committee is expected to vote on McConnell's nomination on June 17.

* * *

The Chamber believes McConnell is "unfit to serve this lifetime appointment to the federal bench," said R. Bruce Josten, the Chamber's executive vice president for government affairs in the letter.

"Mr. McConnell's actions during his career as a personal injury lawyer and past statements demonstrate his disregard for the rule of law, an activist judicial philosophy and obvious bias against business," stated the letter.



Read more: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202462771489&Chamber_of_Commerce_Intensifies_Campaign_Against_Federal_Judicial_Nominee

---

The U.S. Chamber is at it again attacking President Obama and his nominees.

[msongs]

1. why not attack, maybe the CofC can get specal treatment like the NRA nt

[TomCADem]

2. Many On The Left Like Glenn Greenwald Support Citizens United...

...and Jonathan Turley, another frequent guest of Keith Olbermann, opposes gun control, so perhaps cutting a deal with the NRA was "liberal." Here is Turley arguing in support of gun rights.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_96/ma_congressional_relations/43683-1.html

While gun control is usually a reliable rallying point for the right and left, there is a major complication in the case over the court’s practice of picking and choosing which rights in the Bill of Rights are applied to the states. Many civil libertarians are not thrilled over gun rights but want the court to use the decision to finally rule that all of the rights contained in the Bill of Rights apply to the states with no exceptions. Conversely, many conservatives want the gun rights but do not want the expansion of rights that apply to the states under the Bill of Rights.

Any way this case goes, it will be historic. Even under current case law, the court is likely to find that Second Amendment right does apply to the states. It would certainly make it harder for states to restrict gun ownership. It will not mean that states can place no restrictions on gun possession or ownership. Even First Amendment rights have some limitations. The incorporation of the Second Amendment would make the right of gun ownership comparable to the right of free exercise of religion.

The court should go further, however, and change not just the status of gun rights but rights generally. The court should remove the current firewall between the application of federal rights to the states — creating a unified base of rights for all citizens. This is why some conservatives want to change the status of gun rights but not the Bill of Rights. They fear that future federal rulings could favor gay couples or other groups and then bind the states.