DiFi explains her vote for Southwick

Over a month ago, I sent Dianne Feinstein an email letting her know how disappointed I was that she chose to  join all Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee to send Leslie Southwick’s nomination to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to the Senate floor.

Just a reminder, 2 decisions that drew outrage from everyone who isn't a right-wing Republican:

In one, the court voted to reinstate a white state employee who had been fired for calling a black co-worker a "good ol' n-." In the other case, the court upheld a decision to remove an 8-year-old child from her bisexual mother, in a ruling that referred to the woman's "homosexual lifestyle." Southwick also signed another judge's separate opinion that described homosexuality as a choice that carries consequences.

.

Additionally, Dick Durbin, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, had this to say afterwards:

At yesterday’s confirmation hearing, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) noted that in his earler  testimony, Southwick couldn’t recall one time when he had ruled in favor of a worker or consumer. And that, said Durbin, “was a softball question.”

So I wrote her (over a month ago) and finally received the following response:

Thank you for writing to me regarding the nomination of Judge Leslie H. Southwick to be a United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit. I appreciate your taking the time to share your views, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

          The Constitution requires the President to nominate Federal judges by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. As a member of the Senate who also serves on the Judiciary Committee, I take my position with regard to reviewing judicial nominations very seriously.

          When I review a nominee, I look to find candidates who have the necessary intellect, analytical skills, and legal experience. In addition, the candidate should be able to demonstrate a commitment to applying the law fairly and impartially. You can be assured that I perform my due diligence with regard to any nominee that comes before the Judiciary Committee.

As you may already know, on August 2, Judge Southwick was voted out of the Judiciary Committee favorably by a vote of 10-9.  I voted in favor of sending his nomination to the full Senate. Please know that I carefully considered the concerns you raised.  However, after thorough review of Judge Southwick's record and after a lengthy meeting with him, I decided that he has the qualifications that I mentioned above to be a judge. While he is not the nominee that I would have chosen for this seat, I concluded that his views were not outside the judicial mainstream. He also has an exemplary record of service to our nation, including a one-year tour of combat duty in Iraq, which he volunteered for even though he was already over 50 years of age.

Once again, thank you for your letter. I hope you will continue to keep me informed on matters of importance to you. Best regards.

Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
       United States Senator

I'm still appalled.  The only acknoweldgement that Leslie Southwick is a racist, homophobic pig is couched in the phrase, "Please know that I carefully considered the concerns you raised."  No she didn't, because if she did she wouldn't have voted to send him on to the Senate for confirmation.

I'll let her know that I believe the reasons she voted for him are explained very well by Christy Hardin Smith at Firedoglake.  

•  Tips for writing my Senator

  by dave1042 on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:14:38 AM PDT

•  Hmmm

  I decided that he has the qualifications that I mentioned above to be a judge. While he is not the nominee that I would have chosen for this seat, I concluded that his views were not outside the judicial mainstream.

  No, Southwick is not outside the judicial mainstream of the Gonzales DoJ, but is otherwise a federalist bigot.

  by DWG on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:22:41 AM PDT

  •  Southwick is not outside DiFi's mainstream

    but ms DiFi is waaaaaay outside the mainstream of average Americans...and she could care less...as long as her own family financials remain positively effected by the increase in MIC spending DiFi is happy to be a thorn in the side of 'mainstream America'

    she SHOULD have been seriously challenged for her seat in the democratic primary in 06..but she wasnt.

    by KnotIookin on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:41:21 AM PDT

    •  I've always wondered....

      if these nominee votes were traded - for some other benefit to Dems supporting these outrageous nominees.

      by annefrank on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 09:03:31 AM PDT

      •  he is not outrageous to DiFi

        we are a divided party...the reporting on that is true.  we have three wings, a strong progressive one, a moderate go with the flow one and people like difi, who are personally compromised but long time incumbants in seats that, for them, are SAFE.

        Difi is extremely compromised by her husbands business with the MIC and needed to be retired in the last election.  NOW she probably, due to her age, will not seek another term after this one so she has no reason to NOT move further and further to the 'america incorporate' crowd....

        she should have been challeneged in her primary in 06...she wasnt ... she has no reason now to be part of the NEW more progressive Demcratic party, in fact she has alot of (personal financial) reasons to
        side with the 'other side' especially in judicial nominees, ones that will rule favorably for BIG BUSINESS at the expense of we, the people.

        the publicly made objections to southwick were based on racial concerns...but I say follow his rulings on 'we the people vs BIG BUSINESS cases and you might find the real reasons DiFi decided HE belonged on our bench.

        by KnotIookin on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 09:18:04 AM PDT

        •  Yep! Big Business has ruled the Dem Party

          for a long time. That's why I support John Edwards.

          by annefrank on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 09:32:07 AM PDT

          •  Big Biz has ruled SOME of our party

            the lure of $$$ seems to be to hard for some to resist.  these people, when compromised, need to go find other jobs...they are no longer looking out for the 'common good'

            I like John Edwards...but I am waiting for AL GORE :)

            by KnotIookin on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 09:59:21 AM PDT

  •  Right, this is the key phrase...

    I concluded that his views were not outside the judicial mainstream.

    DiFi is my Senator...usually I would lean in her direction becasue she virtually always votes the same as Boxer and she's got experience. Well, her experience is her albatross now...she needs to move on...and NOT to the Supreme Court.

    California deserves an activist leader in the Senate and we have a deep bench...Shelia Kuehl, Sanchez, Hayden...time to say good bye to Di.

    by kck on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:54:07 AM PDT

  •  Federalist bigot?

    I'm pretty federalist myself, and plenty of dems and libs have federalist leanings themselves; can I presume that you meant 'federalist + bigot' rather than 'federalist = bigot'?

    by burrow owl on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 10:03:39 AM PDT

    •  My bad

      Federalist Society bigot is what I meant to say.  I am a federalist, but the Federalist Society is home to the R.A.T.S.  (Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia).  Sorry for the confusion.  

      by DWG on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 10:40:24 AM PDT

•  She's my Senator too

  and I have never gotten a satisfactory response from her, and yes, always a month after the fact. Most of the time, the response doesn't have anything to do with what I wrote about.

  I have given up writing, and call instead. Her staff is equally as unresponsive to questions, but I call numerous times to all of her offices anyway. I have seen her change her intended vote on the basis of a lot of phone calls.

  She is the epitome of arrogant and unresponsive to her constituents. It's very frustrating.

  by cat on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:38:55 AM PDT

•  Tour in Iraq? WTF...

  The fact that she had to mention his military service which as far as I can tell has absolutely nothing to do with his qualifications is simply pathetic. Really a sad commentary on how screwed up things are in DC. Of course the Repubs gave Clinton's nominees lots of deference...oh, right.

  One could argue that military service would be important for C in C (although I would respectfully disagree) but I know that going AWOL would definitely have an impact on my opinion of his qualifications. How in the world did the press let that idiot become President?

  by ORDem on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:46:52 AM PDT

  •  My thoughts exactly

    This is no different than Bill Richardson saying he admired Whizzer White because of his football career.

    Jesus, screw her. This is so unacceptable.

    by DavidNYC on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:54:34 AM PDT

  •  It's colleague etiquette

    Of course, I can't speak for her, but I suspect that goes to the theory of entitlement...you do this you're entitled to that. For instance, a Congress critter that has served in the Congress for 30 years and want a run at the Senate...by the theory of entitlement, s/he served their country and if they want to do it in a different way they deserve a shot. He served in Iraq so he gets a shot at whatever else he wants to do...

    by kck on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 08:58:59 AM PDT

  •  What kind of unit was he in?

    Commander of the towel-boys at a swimming pool in the Green Zone wouldn't mean a thing.  I knew plenty of people in Germany in '68 (remember the Czech invasion?) who manned 'jump-qualified typewriters' at headquarters behind the lines.  If he was an infantry platoon leader somewhere, that DiFi statement might have a little cred.  At the same time, he'd not likely still be the bigot he is if he had been in a command like that.

    by watercarrier4diogenes on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 10:19:51 AM PDT

•  re: the merits:

  Were I a senator, I'd look to her jurisprudence, rather than to seemingly-sensational-but-actually-pretty-mundate-case that turns on boring crap like standards of review and deference to state agencies.  And, absent more, it seems like a real stretch to claim the judge is a "racist...pig."

  by burrow owl on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 10:17:33 AM PDT

•  what do you expect

  from the senator who personally backed condoleeza rice for secretary of state?

  DiFi should surprise noone. her record's out there.

  by wu ming on Sat Sep 08, 2007 at 10:58:59 AM PDT