The Ninth Circuit nominee's omission of many speaking engagements from his Senate questionnaire responses has prompted an outcry in some conservative circles. Minnesota lawprof Richard Painter -- who worked with a number of President Bush's nominees to the bench in the confirmation process, and has also been a valued friend of this site -- finds the indignation misplaced: someone in Liu's position gives a great many public talks and omission does not imply attempted concealment. "Rather than posturing over yet one more 'missing documents' episode in Washington, the Senate should perhaps look at this nomination on the merits and vote." [Legal Ethics Forum, which Prof. Painter recently joined as a new contributor] More: Ed Whelan of NRO "Bench Memos" responds.
Goodwin Liu nomination: gotcha-ism and substance
- NY Times partisan hackery department: filibuster division
- Reuters fact check
- Rejection of D.C. Circuit nominee may shift judicial nomination practices
- ABA opposes substantial number of Obama Administration's potential judicial nominees
- WSJ on John "Jack" McConnell (D.R.I.) nomination
- Around the web, February 10
- Judicial confirmations
- "Lawyering unto perdition"
- More on the John McConnell (D.R.I.) nomination
- Goodwin Liu on judges' writings
- Jonathan Adler on the Liu nomination
- Obama judicial nominations and the NYT
- Cass Sunstein confirmed for top regulatory post
- Ideological predilections of federal appeals courts