Sen. Jeff Sessions 'troubled' over Obama court picks

Legal News Feed

The top Republican on the Senate committee reviewing Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court said Monday that he is concerned President Obama is driving federal courts "far to the left" by choosing "activist" judges for the bench.


Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said Obama's judicial nominees, including Sotomayor and three others to the U.S. Court of Appeals, raise questions about what role a judge's background should play in deciding cases.

"I'm troubled, I have to say, by President Obama's philosophy of judging," Sessions, a Senate Judiciary Committee member, told USA TODAY and Gannett Washington Bureau reporters. "When he talks about wanting a judge to show empathy, that's very troubling to me."

Sessions, a former prosecutor, said he does not expect Republicans to filibuster Sotomayor's nomination, but he said she is the latest in a pattern of Obama nominees he has found troublesome.

"She seems to be willing to accept that a judge's rulings may be influenced by the judge's personal backgrounds or feelings, which is sort of what President Obama has said," Sessions said.

Hearings for Sotomayor's nomination are scheduled to begin July 13.

Sessions singled out three other nominations: David Hamilton of Indiana for the Chicago-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit; Andre Davis of Maryland for the Richmond, Va.-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit; and Gerard Lynch of New York for the New York City-based 2nd Circuit.

University of Pittsburgh law professor Arthur Hellman, who has studied judicial appointments, said it is difficult to generalize about any Obama pattern with so few nominations.

"The differences struck me more than any similarities," Hellman said of the nominees. "Lynch is a straight-down-the-middle former prosecutor. With Hamilton, you have someone who happens to have two high-profile cases in two of the most contested areas of the law, abortion and prayer."

Sessions focused on two Hamilton rulings. In one, Hamilton invalidated an Indiana law requiring women seeking abortions to obtain information about the procedure's risks. In the other, Hamilton forbade references to Jesus Christ in opening prayers at the Indiana Legislature. Both decisions were reversed.

Related listings

  • Hearing for Supreme Court nominee poses challenges

    Hearing for Supreme Court nominee poses challenges

    Legal News Feed 06/15/2009

    U.S. Senate Republicans are in a quandary over the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, aiming to raise pointed questions about her record without angering increasingly influential Hispanic voters. Senator John Cornyn exemplifies the Republic...

  • DOJ moves to dismiss first fed gay marriage case

    DOJ moves to dismiss first fed gay marriage case

    Legal News Feed 06/12/2009

    The U.S. Justice Department has moved to dismiss the first gay marriage case filed in federal court, saying it is not the right venue to tackle legal questions raised by a couple already married in California. The motion, filed late Thursday, argued ...

  • SC high court orders Gov. Sanford to request money

    SC high court orders Gov. Sanford to request money

    Legal News Feed 06/05/2009

    South Carolina's Supreme Court ordered Gov. Mark Sanford on Thursday to request $700 million in federal stimulus money aimed primarily at struggling schools, ending months of wrangling with legislators who accused him of playing politics with people'...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read