Time for a reset on judicial nominations

The American people need to have faith in the basic fairness of our courts, which should not be stacked with those who have made a point of actively working against the rights of others. There is undoubtedly no shortage of conservative lawyers and judges who would serve with distinction if confirmed to a seat on the federal judiciary. This administration need not reach for the most extreme among them, thereby ensuring that millions of citizens will question whether they will have meaningful access to justice.

One-third of Trump’s nominees have a record of open hostility to the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Americans. John Bush, now confirmed, once used the term “faggot” in a public speech. Damien Schiff referred to distinguished Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy as a “judicial prostitute” in part because of Kennedy’s legacy of recognizing the equal dignity of LGBT people in his opinions.

{mosads}Thomas Alvin Farr, nominated to serve as a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, who actively participated in the intimidation of African-American voters and then lied about to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

When a president selects extremists for the judiciary who demonstrate contempt for whole segments of the population, he not only demonstrates his own contempt for those same groups of citizens but also undermines the essential impartiality of our courts.

Consider Jeff Mateer, Trump’s nominee for a seat on a federal district court in Texas. Mateer famously said that transgender children are evidence of “how Satan’s plan is working and the destruction that’s going on.” He gave several speeches at a conference organized by a “pastor” who says LGBT people are worthy of death, and he thinks it’s fine to subject children to bogus and harmful “conversion therapy” to change their sexual orientation or gender identity.

By contrast, in a recent opinion halting Trump’s transgender military ban, this is how a sitting judge described the transgender community:

“The Court is aware of no argument or evidence suggesting that being transgender in any way limits one’s ability to contribute to society. The exemplary military service of Plaintiffs in this case certainly suggests that it does not. … Many have years of experience in the military. Some have decades. They have been deployed on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have and continue to serve with distinction.”

With some exceptions, the majority of the president’s judicial nominees who had not yet been confirmed by the end of 2017 were returned to the White House, standard procedure at the close of a congressional session.

Rather than reflexively renominate them, the Trump administration has a chance to pause and consider the broader implications of what it is doing with respect to the courts. Recent electoral results reveal that the public is rejecting extreme partisanship, and the White House could demonstrate true leadership by taking a responsible approach to judicial nominations. If it does not, the Senate must do its job and refuse to confirm those who are patently unqualified by virtue of either lack of experience or by having crusaded against equality and civil rights.

At the start of this new year, President Trump should seize the opportunity to show that he can, in fact, be a president for all Americans by nominating to the federal bench upstanding jurists who will dispense justice equally and fairly to all. But if that does not occur, Congress must take a stand to protect the fairness and independence of our judiciary. The American people are counting on you.

Julianna S. Gonen is Policy Director at National Center for Lesbian Rights.