Executive Session

Floor Speech

EXECUTIVE SESSION -- (Senate - November 19, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I will not support Judge David Hamilton's elevation to the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. After close review, I believe Judge Hamilton's writings and statements show an unwillingness to serve as a neutral arbiter of the law.

At the time he was appointed to the district court for the Southern District of Indiana, the American Bar Association rated Judge Hamilton ``not qualified.'' This rating is still apt.

In numerous opinions written during his tenure on the district court, Judge Hamilton has displayed a lack of impartiality, a disregard for precedent, and a willingness to legislate from the bench. His writings also evince his propensity to value ``an understanding of the world from another's point of view'' above an understanding of the facts of a case.

For instance, in striking down Indiana's popularly enacted informed-consent abortion law, Judge Hamilton radically ruled that the law unconstitutionally imposed an ``undue burden'' on the right to an abortion because it qallegedly forced ``women to make two trips to a clinic.'' A Woman's Choice v. Newman, 132 F.Supp.2d 1150, 1151, S.D. Ind. 2001. In making this ruling, Judge Hamilton flaunted the directly applicable precedents of the Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit. He also, according to Seventh Circuit opinion that reversed his ruling, relied on a ``faulty study by biased researchers who operated in a vacuum of speculation.'' A Woman's Choice v. Newman, 305 F.3d 684, 689, 7th Cir. 2002.

Similarly, in a case where a child's complaint to school officials about her mother's drug abuse led to the mother's arrest, Judge Hamilton suppressed the drug evidence against the mother on the ground that the police had violated her substantive due process right to ``family integrity.'' United States v. McCotry, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62777, S.D. Ind., July 13, 2006. To reach this conclusion, Judge Hamilton ignored controlling Seventh Circuit law and relied instead on the dissenting opinions of Ninth Circuit judges. And when the Seventh Circuit reversed Judge Hamilton, it chastised him for not properly considering the wrongs of the mother in the case, who ``risked her relationship with her nine-year old daughter by dealing drugs.'' United States v. Hollingsworth, 495 F.3d 795, 803 n.3, 7th Cir. 2007.

In these cases, and many more, Judge Hamilton has shown an unvarnished result-orientation and has confirmed his reputation as ``one of the more liberal judges in the district.'' Almanac of the Federal Judiciary. This record has not earned him the honor of elevation to a higher court.

As President Obama's first nominee, there is no doubt that Judge Hamilton possesses the empathy and desire to write ``footnotes to the Constitution'' that catch the eye of liberal activists and partisan politicians. But these qualities are not ones that a Circuit Judge of the United States should possess. Accordingly, I will vote no on the confirmation of Judge David Hamilton.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source