Confirmation of Pickering Defeated
Feature Story by Ritu Kelotra - 10/31/2003
The Senate voted (54 to 43) against invoking cloture on the nomination of Charles Pickering to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In order to invoke cloture – or shut down debate – Republicans needed to round-up 60 votes, which in turn would have disallowed a Democratic filibuster.The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR) issued a statement and applauded the majority of Senate Democrats for opposing the confirmation of Charles Pickering to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit:
"Pickering's record as a district court judge and as a state senator shows his hostility to LCCR priorities, including civil rights and constitutional issues. Further, throughout Pickering's career, he has demonstrated a commitment to the reversal of a number of these rights, for which LCCR has fought for more than 50 years. LCCR believes that the Senate has a constitutional responsibility to the American people to scrutinize all judicial nominations and to oppose jurists like Charles Pickering, whose record shows hostility for civil rights."
The Senate Judiciary Committee had voted (10 to 9) on October 2 to approve Pickering for the Fifth Circuit. Although the committee voted against the confirmation of Pickering more than one year before that, President Bush re-nominated him in an unprecedented move in January 2003.
"Never in the history of this Republic has a President re-nominated to the same post a judicial nominee voted down by this Committee — never until this Administration chose to re-nominate Judge Pickering and Justice Owen this year," Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in a statement. "Until this President, the Committee's rejection of a judicial nominee on the merits was respected as a function of the Senate's process of advice and consent."
More than 60 national organizations opposed the confirmation of Pickering, a former Mississippi district court judge, to the Fifth Circuit, which is known as the most conservative circuit in the United States. Covering Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana, the Fifth Circuit also has the largest percentage of people of color of any circuit in the country.
The Mississippi State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) passed a resolution in opposition to Pickering's confirmation.
"The Mississippi State Conference of Branches of the NAACP reaffirms its solidarity against the nomination/ confirmation of the United States District Judge Charles Pickering, Sr. to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals," the resolution resolves. "Be it further resolved that this opposition is based solely on politically philosophical differences, minority under representation on the 5th Circuit and a need to fairly balance the impact that the rulings of the Fifth would have on the civil rights of all citizens with its jurisdiction."
In addition to the NAACP Mississippi State Conference, ten other Mississippi-based organizations had voiced their opposition to Pickering. In a letter released on October 29, more than a dozen environmental groups stated their opposition to Pickering also.
"Our opposition is based upon Judge Pickering's judicial record and ethics," the letter from environmental groups states. "He repeatedly denied citizens access to justice in violation of controlling precedent; favored powerful interests at the expense of the rights of ordinary Americans and the environment; and breached legal standards to implement his personal agenda."
The Sierra Club, which also opposed Pickering's confirmation, issued a statement in light of the Republicans failure to garner the votes for a cloture:
"The Sierra Club today applauded Senators for opposing Charles Pickering's re-nomination to the Fifth Circuit... The Bush Administration continues to nominate judges who are out of step with most Americans, and is working alongside civil rights groups, labor unions and women's groups to protect America's courts from extreme judges."
Opponents of Pickering maintain that several examples throughout his career as a judge have revealed a troubling record on civil rights. One glaring example was when presiding over a 1994 trial involving a cross burning in the yard of an interracial family, Pickering told prosecutors that the sentence for the convicted defendant was too severe, even though the law mandated the punishment. In the end, Pickering successfully persuaded prosecutors to lower the charge with the long sentence.
