Underneath Their Robes

A Cool New Website

Article III groupies everywhere are sure to love this new website: The Robing Room.

The Robing Room is sort of like an online version of the Almanac of the Federal Judiciary. At the site, lawyers (and others) can say basically whatever they want about federal judges -- on an anonymous basis.

But the Robing Room has some advantages over the AFJ. Since it's online, it's updated more frequently, and it's accessible to everyone (not just subscribers). And it's free, which is nice, since the AFJ costs a pretty penny.

Of course, the Robing Room is only as good as the information the editors receive. So head over there and put in your two cents about your favorite -- and least favorite -- Article III judges.

Remember: federal judges are public figures. Actual malice, baby!

Click here to check out The Robing Room. Enjoy!

Riding Circuit -- In a Taxicab?

Judge Thomas M. Hardiman (W.D. Pa.) is quite the judicial wunderkind. He was appointed to the federal trial bench before the age of 40. And now, after less than three years of service as a district judge, he may be in line for a promotion:

Thomas M. Hardiman, 41, who became a judge in the Western District of Pennsylvania in October 2003, could fill a vacancy created on the appeals court after Richard L. Nygaard, of Erie, became a senior judge last summer.

His colleagues have nice things to say about him: "an absolute star," who is "intelligent, hard-working and willing to listen." (But this comment, from former Chief Judge Donald Ziegler, sounds a trifle backhanded: Hardiman turned out to be a "very, very pleasant surprise on the District Court.")

Interesting tidbit: Judge Hardiman worked as a taxi driver before attending law school.

"Um, the far corner, please. Yeah, right here is just fine. Can I get twelve back, Your Honor?"

Judge Hardiman considered for federal appeals post [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]
U.S. judge here eyed for court of appeals [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review]

(Robe swish: How Appealing)

A3G Visits One First Street!

Today your beloved blogress paid a visit to the Supreme Court. Yes, that's right -- Article III Groupie swung by One First Street.

Visiting the Court fills A3G with mixed emotions. On the one hand, it brings up painful memories of how her hopes of joining the Elect were dashed. On the other hand, it's always a thrill to see the justices in the flesh -- and, of course, to hobnob with their clerks.

Some random observations:

1. When the justices enter the courtroom, after the thrilling cry of "oyez, oyez," the height differentials are quite striking. Justice Ginsburg is tiny! You could smuggle her into Disneyworld in your fannypack.

2. Justice Breyer does a nice job of handing down an opinion. His voice is loud and clear, he moves through the reasoning well, and he mentions the key cases. You're reminded that he used to be a professor.

3. Justice Kennedy also acquits himself well in delivering a decision. And his job was much harder -- summarzing the bewildering tangle of opinions and judgments in the Texas redistricting case. (Of course, much of the mess is due to the way that he voted.)

4. Chief Justice Roberts -- what a hunk! He can make even Article 35 of the Vienna Convention sound sexy. A3G wouldn't mind having "Consular Relations" with the Chief!

5. The justices were pretty quiet during the handing down of opinions. There wasn't much of the cross-talk and whispering that one sees between the justices during oral argument.

Yes, Justice Thomas looked like he was dozing off; but his chair was rocking too much for him to be truly asleep. Justice Alito, the new kid on the block, looked alert. He occasionally sipped water out of a silver tumbler. Justice Scalia drank coffee out of a bright green, reflective mug -- the kind that law students get for free from BarBri reps. Every time he took a sip, the mug sent a reflected beam of green light out into the audience. Weird.

Okay, that's all for now. More details about A3G's visit, as well as lots of pictures, are available here. Still more photos are available here.

Breaking: Chicago's Dirksen Courthouse Under Lockdown

Details here and here. (Gavel bang: How Appealing.)

The individual that authorities are searching for, Larnell Rogers, is not believed to be dangerous. Furthermore, contrary to initial reports, he is not an escaped prisoner. This will probably turn out to be no big deal.

But in light of recent breaches of courthouse security, as well as attacks upon judges and their families -- including the horrific killings of the husband and mother of Judge Joan Lefkow (N.D. Ill.), whose chambers are in the Dirksen building -- one can't be too careful.

Update: A reader points out:

A prisoner escaped and killed two guards in the Dirksen in 1992, before being gunned down in the driveway out of the building parking lot, so that probably looms large, too. An award is now named after one of the guards, Harry Belluomini.

Further Update: CNN is reporting that the Dirksen Courthouse building is no longer under lockdown -- not because Rogers has been apprehended, but because it appears he has left the building.

Hands Off Justice Nathan Hecht

Article III Groupie wasn't exactly kind to White House Counsel Harriet Miers during her unsuccessful quest for a Supreme Court seat. A3G poked fun at Miers's constantly changing hairstyles, her qualifications for the post, her knowledge of Supreme Court history, and her taste in books.

But A3G can't condone what's happening to Miers's onetime paramour, Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht. The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct is criticizing Hecht for the interviews he gave to the news media concerning Miers, on the theory that he violated the canon prohibiting a judge from "advanc[ing] the private interests of the judge or others." More details here.

A3G hasn't taken a close look at this issue, so perhaps she's missing something; but at first glance, this strikes her as dubious. Were the Third Circuit judges who testified before the Senate about Justice Samuel A. Alito acting unethically? What about Judges Walter Stapleton and Alex Kozinski, when they testified in support of their former law clerk, newly confirmed Judge Brett Kavanaugh?

What about a judge who writes a letter of recommendation for a former law clerk, or who agrees to serve as a reference for that clerk? What if a judge recommends a former clerk for a job -- e.g., a Supreme Court clerkship -- in the hope of burnishing his own judicial prestige and influential network of ex-clerks (e.g., the Luttigators)?

Isn't that judge "advanc[ing] the private interests of the judge or others"? And if so -- so what?

A UTR Salute to Judge Presnell

Being a good trial judge -- which is a far more difficult than being a good appellate judge -- requires the ability to cut through a lot of b.s.

Measured by this standard, it appears that Judge Gregory A. Presnell (M.D. Fla.) is nothing short of awesome.

Lawyers make everything so needlessly complicated. For example, who needs the voir dire process? What a waste of time! Just pick jurors using "Eeny meeny miney mo."

Judge orders lawyers to play game [Fortune]

Bench-Slapped: Scalia v. Alito?

Yes, you read that right. If you thought that Justice Alito was just going to be an acolyte of Justice Scalia -- Sancho Panza to Nino's Don Quijote* -- think again. You can read all about their spat here.

* Perhaps that was a less-than-ideal metaphor; Scalia looks more like Sancho Panza than Alito. Indeed, one devotee of Nino has bestowed upon him the nickname of "Sancho Panza from New Jersey."

Better Late Than Never: Brett Kavanaugh Confirmed to the D.C. Circuit

When Brett Kavanaugh was first nominated to the D.C. Circuit, he wasn't even married. Now he and his wife -- Bush's personal secretary, Ashley Estes -- have a college-age daughter.

(Okay, fine, it hasn't been that long. But Brett and Ashley's daughter, Margaret, is almost nine months old.)

After three long years, Brett Kavanaugh (AMK/OT 1993) -- a former law clerk to Judge Walter K. Stapleton and Judge Alex Kozinski, both of whom testified before the Senate on his behalf -- has been confirmed to the D.C. Circuit. The vote was 57-37. Congratulations, Judge Kavanaugh!

It's a good time of year to be joining the D.C. Circuit. Those judicial mandarins take the summer off -- just like the Supreme Court, a common destination for D.C. Circuit members. So Judge Kavanaugh will have a few months to get his chambers up and running before oral arguments start.

The rumor mill is saying that Kavanaugh may pick up some of the displaced Luttig clerks for next year. Can anyone confirm?

Random Fun Facts About Brett Kavanaugh

Yesterday Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the all-powerful D.C. Circuit was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, by a 10-8, party-line vote. This followed on the heels of Kavanaugh's recent testimony before the Committee on Wednesday, as part of his second confirmation hearing.

Kavanaugh, of course, is a member of the Elect; he clerked for Judges Walter Stapleton and Alex Kozinski, en route to Justice Kennedy (OT 1993). Via the Washington Post, here are some fun facts about him:

--"Kavanaugh's ties to Bush were strengthened when he played a major role in the legal battle over Florida's fiercely contested 2000 presidential vote. He later joined the White House counsel's office and then became staff secretary, where he oversees all paper that goes into the Oval Office. Two years ago, he married Bush's personal secretary, Ashley Estes.

--"His mother, Martha, was a Montgomery County Circuit Court judge. His father, Edward, also a lawyer, headed the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association for two decades."

A UTR source commented to A3G: "I wasn't surprised to hear that [Kavanaugh's] dad was a lawyer for the cosmetics industry. Did you see how much make-up Kavanaugh's mom wore to his hearing?"

With all due respect to Judge Martha Kavanaugh -- who is surely a superb jurist and an amazing mother -- A3G can't help noting:

Wearing excessive make-up is so state-court-judge...

More on Judge Luttig Flying Off to Boeing

As one of you noted in the comments to this post, Jess Bravin and J. Lynn Lunsford's article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal is a "must read." (Gavel bang for pass-through link: How Appealing.)

(Random bit of trivia: as noted here, Bravin is the brother of one of the Elect, Eric Bravin, who clerked for Justice Ginsburg during October Term 2000.)

Here are some highlights from the article:

On Nov. 22, U.S. Circuit Judge J. Michael Luttig was at work in his chambers here when he received a telephone call telling him to switch on the television. There, he saw Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announce that the government would file charges against Jose Padilla in a federal court -- treating the accused terrorist like a normal criminal suspect.

The judge was stunned. Two months earlier, he had written a landmark opinion saying the government could hold Mr. Padilla without charge in a military brig. (Read the opinion.) The decision validated President Bush's claim that he could set aside Mr. Padilla's constitutional rights in the name of national security. The judge assumed the government had a compelling reason to consider the suspect an extraordinary threat. Now Mr. Gonzales wanted the courts to forget the whole case.

It didn't take long for the judge's anger to burst out into the open. The next month he wrote that moves such as the attorney general's cast doubt on the Bush administration's "credibility before the courts." Judge Luttig tried to block Mr. Padilla's transfer to civilian custody from the brig. (Read the opinion.) The administration's top litigator fired back that the judge "defies both law and logic."

The clash, which underscores the increasing skepticism among even some conservative jurists toward the Bush administration's sweeping theories of executive power, culminated yesterday in Judge Luttig's resignation. The 51-year-old judge, once considered a likely Bush nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, stepped down from his lifetime seat on the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to start a new career in Chicago as general counsel for Boeing Co.

WOW. As one of you accurately noted in an email to A3G, Luttig comes off in the article as alternating between "petty and principled."

And check out this, from later on in the article (after a lengthy recitation of the procedural history of the Padilla case, which A3G will spare you):

People familiar with Judge Luttig's thinking say he knew his condemnation of the administration [in one of his Padilla opinions] would bring a personal cost but he believes that judges must apply the law regardless of its political implications. These people say he has been disillusioned by the encroachment of politics on the judiciary -- and the view that judges are on "our team" or "their team."

People close to the Bush administration see it differently. They dismiss Judge Luttig's opinion as a judicial tantrum, noting that it came after he was passed over three times for a Supreme Court position. President Bush nominated Judge Roberts, Harriet Miers (who withdrew) and Judge Samuel Alito.

Interesting, interesting stuff... More to come, as A3G goes through her inbox...