On Friday, in a 4 to 3 decision by the Virginia Supreme Court, Governor Terry McAuliffe’s use of an executive order aimed at restoring the voting rights of over 200,000 convicted felons was ruled unconstitutional. While Republicans celebrated the decision as a great victory, they seemed to ignore how close they came to nominating McAuliffe’s handpicked jurist Jane Marum Roush to a 12 year term just four months ago. Had Republicans gone forward, putting Roush on the bench, this 4-3 decision on Friday likely would have ruled in the other direction.
This is a lesson Virginians ought never forget.
On March 2nd, Jane Marum Roush was endorsed by the Republican Senate for a 12 year term on the Supreme Court just before the Republicans in the House of Delegates voted down her nomination.
Earlier in the day and with little notice, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee abruptly certified Roush.
12 comments
We have gotten far enough away from the Va. SC fight that I am going to jump in and disagree. I disagree, not with how Gen. Assembly Republicans handled it but with the presumed outcome of political cases.
I have great respect for SBT. In the article above there are two conclusions:
1. Had Republicans gone forward, putting Roush on the bench, this 4-3 decision on Friday likely would have ruled in the other direction.
2. “had Roush been seated on the Supreme Court, McAuliffe’s felon ploy would have gone unimpeded.”
I’ll give you the breakdown on this decision:
There are seven permanent Justices.
ROUGHLY speaking the Justices fit into the following partisan categories:
McClanahan (R)
McCullough (R)
Lemons (R)
Mims (R)
Kelsey (D)
Goodwyn (D)
Powell (D)
Here is how the decision turned out:
Striking down the Executive Order:
McClanahan (R)
McCullough (R)
Lemons (R)
Kelsey (D)
Dissenting (for differing reasons):
Mims (R)
Goodwyn (D)
Powell (D)
The partisan split on the existing SC undermines the premise here.
More importantly. I have practiced before both Judge Alston and Justice Roush. I have found them to be fair, intelligent, and honorable jurists. Presuming that Judge Roush would simply rule on a partisan basis is wholly inconsistent with my experience before her. McAuliffe should never have handled the appointment like he did, but I disagree with the suggestion that Justice Roush is a partisan hack.
This is just one more unfortunate legacy that the Obama administration has left with us. He so thoroughly attempted to politicize the judiciary via his bench appointments with so many openly partisan political judges, often driven by their view of social justice motivations rather then the legal text, we generally assume all progressive appointments come from this common pool of candidates.
I was attending a conference recently where in attendance were a wide selection of recent law school graduates from several different law schools all preparing to begin the launch of their legal careers. What struck me was of the several I spoke with not a single one displayed any interest in pursing the actual practice of law in the courtroom. It was all policy consulting, community organization, some form of political function, etc. Not a single one. We have judges today who have little to no actually experience in having practicing the law! I don’t find it unreasonable that some laymen draw conclusions on what the legal educational system is producing today and placing in judgement before us in our federal and state courts.
You would have gotten an upvote if you had added Bush, Clinton, Bush & Reagan to that list of presidents who stacked judge appointments based on partisanship.
Can’t disagree with your position but it has always been my opinion that the Republicans are so consistently bad at receiving the product they believe they are pre selecting to confirm. In 2005 I was present at a dinner in DC where a Bush staffer was regaling the table on what a great conservative pick John Roberts Jr. was following the then recent death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist by President George W. Bush. I had to hide my smile at that one.
Very nice gentleman but who ever vetted him either did not understand conservative philosophy or the job was a very slapdash affair or everyone simply bought the answers at the confirmation hearing as fact because a Rehnquist he most clearly was not though not as ridiculous of a misfire as Ford’s appointment of Stevens. The Republicans so rarely seem to get the product they are aiming for while the Democrats and Obama in particular have been quite effective in politicizing their choices.
I will fully admit that my assumptions (which these most certainly are) follow from a general experience and understanding of the politicization of the courts. I have not heard anything negative about Justice Roush – but I am conditioned to a certain degree of cynicism – for many of the reasons that Lawrence lists below. I also have found that there are tremendous inconsistencies between human beings at various stations in life, as they adapt to new pressures of higher office. Mark Warner’s transition from Governor to Senator for example. I never felt that Mark Warner was a radically liberal Governor, but his service in the Senate has been frustratingly in lock step with Democrat Leadership. I wonder if this would not be true of jurists as well.
But again – all assumptions predicated on experience in general and unrelated to any actual knowledge of Roush herself.
Excellent article.
Are any of these Republicans running for higher office or re-election? Do you think they remember their votes? Remind them!
I think they should be reminded, though I don’t think this should be held against them forever.
You are correct but they should be reminded vehemently when they stray off reservation in the future.
The other guy was probably a good judge, and might not have voted partisan, but we really can’t afford to take any chances.
Yet another reason why you need a viable political party instead of a 2nd place Punchinello and debating society.
I completely agree with you.
Jill Vogel is running for Lt. Governor
Jill is a good example of a Republican who tries to be a voice of reason — this is one of the times that could have bit her — if the appointment would have gone the other way, I believe it would have killed her chances for LG.
But Jill has stood with her party when it counted, so she is still in the running.