Why Should Someone Who Authorized Due Process Free Executions Be A Judge Anyway?

Yesterday, Rand Paul announced he would filibuster the nomination of First Circuit nominee David Baron until the Administration released the OLC memo authorizing the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, as ordered by the Second Circuit last month.

As I wrote in a piece at The Week, I think this move is far more serious a political move than Paul’s earlier filibuster of John Brennan (and since you all know how I fell about Brennan, that’s saying something).

Four years ago, David Barron opened a Pandora’s box, giving presidents an inadequately limited authority to kill Americans outside all normal judicial process. As Paul notes in his letter, it would simply be “irresponsible” for the Senate to confirm his nomination without discovering what the memo could reveal about his views on due process, civil liberties, and international law. In a letter to all 100 senators, the ACLU echoed this language, recalling the precedent of Jay Bybee. “No senator can meaningfully carry out his or her constitutional obligation to provide ‘advice and consent’ on this nomination to a lifetime position as a federal appellate judge without being able to read Mr. Barron’s most important and consequential legal writing.”

The Senate took such an irresponsible step in 2003 with Jay Bybee. It can avoid that mistake here.

Apparently, I’m not alone. Senators Udall and Wyden have both said they would not vote to advance Barron’s nomination without more transparency on that memo  (and remember — they’ve seen it).

Given that makes almost enough people (the GOP plus potentially 6 Democrats under the new filibuster rules) to hold up Barron’s nomination, Obama is making yet another limited hangout, permitting Senators to go read the drone-killing memo in a SCIF.

On Tuesday, the White House offered the senators a concession. It offered all senators to a chance to look at the legal opinion. However, Obama has still not acceded to the Paul and Udall’s call for public disclosure of the memo.

“I can confirm that the administration is working to ensure that any remaining questions member of the Senate have about Mr. Barron’s legal work at the Department of Justice are addressed, including making available in a classified setting a copy of the Al-Awlaki opinion to any senator who wishes to review it, prior to Mr. Barron’s confirmation,” White House Press Seceretary Jay Carney said at a daily briefing for reporters.

“It should be noted that last year members of the Senate Judiciary Committee had access to the memo and in his committee vote Mr. Barron received unanimous Democratic support,” Carney said, referring to a January panel vote in which all Republicans opposed the nominee. “We are confident that David Barron wil be confirmed to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals and that he will serve with distinction.”

So Senators will get to see it. But not the public (even though a court has ordered its release!).

The President of the United States, of the purported most Transparent Administration Evah™, thinks it appropriate to have the Senate vote on a lifetime appointed Circuit Court judge without the public seeing one of that nominees’ most momentous legal arguments ever.

The President thinks it appropriate to control access to information about a nominee who vastly expanded Executive Power.

And ultimately, it’s time this discussion moved to whether the opinion is itself disqualifying.

In a comment to NYT, Wyden put it this way.

Mr. Wyden added that he was also not committed to voting yes.

“Certainly the opinion would not be something I would have written. The question is: Is it disqualifying,” he said, adding that the administration should start the process of releasing the memos. “It needs to be addressed before a vote.”

Frankly, I don’t care how nice or how liberal Barron is. I feel about him like I feel about Jay Bybee. Someone who gets nominated after having rubber stamped such awful executive authorities should not be rewarded with a lifetime seat interpreting the law, because he has already been compromised.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

16 Responses to Why Should Someone Who Authorized Due Process Free Executions Be A Judge Anyway?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz .@papicek @CNN Yep, it is an enduring question, no? Problem is, they'e the best cable news. Which says everything about crappjness of rest
33mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Hey @CNN, you have a prime time hour for "the shroud of turin", but not Global Warming? What kind of charlatans are you??
37mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @RachelBLevinson: Why the FBI needs to protect its intelligence whistleblowers, by @BrennanCenter's Mike German. http://t.co/Fp7bNObt8z
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @kurtopsahl: C'mon guys. Couldn't the unmarked surveillance van in front of @EFF be a little more subtle? http://t.co/9wIiHHTGL1
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel I noted Petraeus plea DOESN'T say "All In" contains no classified info. https://t.co/z7nkt0U3YU Looks like it might. http://t.co/8TBETloU2N
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @PDShinkman: Very strange coincidences b/w dates in Petraeus court docs & notes in Broadwell's "All In": http://t.co/YLg900dlFs http://t…
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade Shush. You're making trouble w/@joelsilberman (who will probably forgive you bc you have a stylish queer look, unlike me).
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade @joelsilberman should train you some. He'll be happy to know you're not allergic to lipstick which can be problematic.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade Did you ever get @joelsilberman training (tho don' think you need it much)? @HumorlessQueers
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade You were oversharing again, weren't you? ;p
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @billmon1 It worked for Bush. @TimothyS
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade You do posts on what you didn't have time to say? Is that a millennial thing?
2hreplyretweetfavorite
May 2014
S M T W T F S
« Apr   Jun »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031