Senator Durbin Statement on Miguel Estrada

Durbin Statement Regarding Miguel Estrada

February 12, 2003

U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) today issued the following statement regarding the nomination of Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals:

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is not just another federal circuit. The D.C. Circuit is the AAA team for the United States Supreme Court, and the White House has made it clear that Miguel Estrada is in line to move up to the major leagues.
So Miguel Estrada is not just another nominee.

Mr. Estrada's personal story is compelling. His legal credentials are impressive. And I believe that the decision of the Bush White House to affirmatively act to add more Hispanics to the judiciary is appropriate.

But his views are so suspect that he has consistently refused to be candid to the Judiciary Committee. He has ducked the real issues and refused to provide the Senate with the legal documents he prepared that would give an insight into his legal thinking.

During Miguel Estrada's hearing, members of the Judiciary Committee asked over 80 questions. Almost all went unanswered. On at least seven occasions, Mr. Estrada refused to answer questions on Supreme Court cases, stating that he did not have an opinion since he had not been personally involved, read the briefs, listened to oral arguments, or independently researched the case. On at least nine occasions, Mr. Estrada refused to answer whether he could name any Supreme Court case with which he disagreed.

As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I strive to be fair and even-handed when dealing with judicial nominees. And I try to ask questions that will provide a balanced picture of how each individual approaches the judiciary's role in protecting the rights and liberties of all Americans.

So when I asked Mr. Estrada to give me his opinion - positive or negative - about any federal judge living or dead throughout the history of the United States, I thought I had asked a question that would give him an opportunity to share his views and give members of the committe a better understanding of how this nominee thinks before we reward him with a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.

Instead, Mr. Estrada refused to state his opinion about anyone. His response: "There is no judge, living or dead, whom I would seek to emulate on the bench, whether in terms of judicial philosophy or otherwise."

In fact, despite being nominated to the second most important court in the country, Mr. Estrada repeatedly refused to answer the most basic questions - questions that virtually any third year law student in America should be able to answer.
Do I belive that this man actually has no opinions? Do I believe that this nominee really doesn't know the answer to basic legal questions? No.

I believe that Mr. Estrada is employing a strategy that was developed a few years ago to hide his true face and his true views from the Senate and from the American people.

When Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, a former Catholic seminarian, testified under oath before this committee that he had never considered the issue of abortion, he established a witness strategy that Miguel Estrada has faithfully followed.

The refusal by Mr. Estrada to clearly and forthrightly answer questions put to him in the course of his confirmation process is an affront to the intelligence and integrity of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the U.S. Senate as a whole. If the United States Senate is to live up to its constitutional obligation we must make certain that this process is about advise and consent, not cat and mouse.

I oppose the evasive tactics practiced to date by Miguel Estrada and his supporters in the Bush Administration and will continue to insist that this nominee honestly and substantively answer questions put to him in the course of his confirmation process before his name is sent to the Senate floor for a vote.