Vol. VIII Issue 167 Sunday, July 06, 2008
Top Story

Click for Superior Video On Demand

Bush Circuit Court Nominee
Further Right than Scalia & Thomas


Justice Janice Rogers Brown: A Record of Ideological Extremism

Political, Legal & Civil Rights Groups Oppose Her 'Poison Pen'

Compiled By GayToday
People For the American Way

California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown's right-wing views have drawn opposition from the People for the American Way and NAACP Washington, D.C.--California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, nominated by President Bush to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, has a record of ideological extremism and aggressive judicial activism that makes her unfit to serve on the appeals court.

Remarkably, her judicial philosophy puts her even further to the right than the most far-right justices now sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

In August, People For the American Way and the NAACP released a joint report opposing Brown's confirmation. In recent weeks, her nomination has met increasing opposition, both in her home state and nationally, from groups including the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Alliance for Justice, AFL-CIO, Alliance for Retired Americans, Americans for Democratic Action, Feminist Majority, NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., NARAL Pro-Choice America, National Bar Association, National Council of Jewish Women, National Organization for Women, National Senior Citizens Law Center, National Women's Law Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, Planned Parenthood, Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, and the Sierra Club. Brown's confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee has been scheduled for Wednesday, October 22.

When Brown was nominated to the state supreme court in 1996, she was found unqualified by the state bar evaluation committee, based not only on her relative inexperience but also because she was "prone to inserting conservative political views into her appellate opinions" and based on complaints that she was "insensitive to established precedent."

Brown's record since she joined the court confirms the accuracy of those concerns. Her many disturbing dissents, often not joined by a single other justice, make it clear that she would use the power of an appeals court seat to try to erect significant barriers for victims of discrimination to seek justice in the courts, and to push an agenda that would undermine privacy, equal protection under the law, environmental protection, and much more.

Far from demonstrating the commitment to fundamental civil and constitutional rights principles that should be shown by all federal court nominees, Brown's record reveals a disturbing tendency to try to remake the law in a way that would undermine these crucial principles.

In speeches as well as in some of her opinions, Brown has embraced the extreme states' rights and anti-federal-government positions of the Federalist Society, the organization of lawyers and judges working to push the law far to the right. What she has called the "Revolution of 1937," when the Supreme Court began to consistently sustain New Deal legislation against legal attack, was in her mind a "disaster" that marked "the triumph of our socialist revolution." This extremist anti-government position is especially outrageous for a nominee to the D.C. Circuit, which has primary jurisdiction for cases involving federal regulatory agencies.

Brown has also been severely criticized concerning her judicial temperament and collegiality. Some of her dissenting opinions have been openly contemptuous of her colleagues. Sources on the court have reportedly stated that her fellow justices have privately complained about her "poison pen" and have called Brown a "loose cannon when she has a typewriter in front of her." Brown received a low ABA rating of "qualified/not qualified" for her nomination to the D.C. Circuit.

This memo reviews some of the most troubling aspects of Brown's record and draws from a more in-depth analysis of her legal rulings published by People For the American Way and the NAACP.
Archive
Search Archives
SEARCH AND BROWSE
More than 5,000 articles in our Archive
New This Issue
Home
Menu Page for
Thursday, September 30, 2004


Top Story
GayToday, Nearly 8 Years Old, Says Goodbye to Its Readers

Entertainment
Dirtying the Waters: A Dirty Shame

Health
New York's Male Crystal Meth Users: Preventing HIV/AIDS

Interview
Joseph Hansen: A Master of Mysteries

Pen Points
Telling Tales: For GLBT History Month

People
George W. Bush's Iraq Fallu-cination

Quotes & Quips
Quotes & Quips

Reviews
Why Marriage? Talking with Author George Chauncey

Technology/Environment
Bush and Kerry Clash on Science

Viewpoint
Whatever Happened to Capitalism?

World
Why a President's Pick of U.S. Judges Spells Life or Death


For More ...
Related Stories
Bush Nominates Another 'Right-Wing Extremist Dream Judge'

Another Bush Judicial Nominee Poses Threat to Ordinary Americans

Bush Pushes Texas Judge-Reject toward U.S. Court of Appeals

Related Sites
People for the American Way

NAACP


© 1997-2008 BEI
The sexual orientation of individuals pictured in and writers for
Gay Today should not be assumed.