Skip to main content

Michael Boggs
Michael Boggs, one of President Obama's federal judge nominees from Georgia, strained credibility in his confirmation hearing by the Judiciary Committee last month when he insisted that he was completely ignorant of an abortion debate swirling in the news and in the legislature when he was there—and where he voted for an amendment that would have essentially created a hit list of abortion providers. Boggs insisted that he didn't know what the amendment was about, despite the lengthy debate in both the state's House and Senate, and that we wasn't even aware that abortion clinics were being attacked and doctors were being threatened and killed when the amendment was being considered.

Pressed by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Al Franken (D-MN) Boggs simply said he was not at all aware that doctors were being murdered. Perhaps realizing how unbelievable that assertion was, Boggs has walked it back in new information he's provided to the senators in writing. He says now that he was aware of the stories, he just didn't link that violence to the amendment, and also says he didn't talk to any of his fellow Democrats about why they were so adamantly opposed to the amendment he voted for.

Several committee members had follow-up questions for Boggs, but Blumenthal homed in on Boggs' self-described lack of awareness about violence aimed at abortion providers. He asked for details on how often Boggs read his local paper at the time, what publications he read, if he talked to Democratic colleagues about the amendment and if he wondered why he was one of just a handful of Democrats who supported it.

Boggs maintained he didn't talk to Democratic leaders or his colleagues about the amendment, and didn't wonder why so many of them opposed it. […]

Franken also had follow-up questions for Boggs on his abortion amendment vote. He asked if he was aware that the amendment had come up for a vote twice in the Georgia House, if he had talked with his colleagues about the measure in the month and a half that passed between those two votes, and if he knew his home-state paper had published an editorial on the risks of the amendment one month before Boggs voted for it.

Boggs responded that he didn't remember talking to anyone about the measure, and has no memory of reading the editorial in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

That still leaves a pretty massive credibility gap for Boggs who says, "I would have been aware of some of the cases of violence at that time, although I do not recall specifically hearing any of these concerns raised relative to this amendment." There was extended debate in the House about precisely the issue of violence when the amendment came up. The controversy had been swirling in the state because the Senate had already rejected the amendment, on precisely the grounds that it could endanger the lives of healthcare providers. That degree of ignorance by a lawmaker about such a prominent controversy just isn't believable. Either that, or it's a disqualification for a lifetime position on the federal bench.

Chances are, these answers aren't going to pass muster with Sens. Blumenthal or Franken, or the rest of the Senate Democrats who have already declared their opposition to Boggs. His nomination might not advance past the Judiciary Committee, where a vote still hasn't been scheduled and senators might still have more questions for him.

Please sign and send the petition: Reject Michael Boggs’s nomination to the U.S. District Court in Georgia.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 12:06 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site