Free Complaint - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

il
{P
i -- ·- nw ` i '~.\"` h I I
is e r etoric is
> l t d Th l`t` l `ll` tr or I "d-
·~\ \ IGEI G . G PO l 1(Z8 VVI 1S S Ollb. [ISI C
; \~.\ \\\ I , I • I I I I I
Q \\\ {IIC fight S CE1H]PEllgD to 1€11'l lH_]LILilClEli CiOllt.
‘. * \\ I .__ _ se. ___ I __ .- . .-_. .. _ .- ee . I .
\ \ BY DEBRA ROSENBERG
\ 'I‘ W'AS MEAN'? AS AN OLIVE BRANCH IN A TIM Ii O1? ESCA-
1 » latin . D . .
, \ railing against {edcraljudges, larnbasting their decisions and
Â¥ \ vying to limit their power. So Supreme Courtjustiee Sandra Day
I.; O’Connor embarked on a quiet campaign to quell the tensions.
Q Several months ago O’Connor invited a handful ol° I louse Repub-_ _p__
- lieans to a private lunch at the court. ln a small dining r09ID outside')-
-_ ‘ her chambers, the group discussed judieiaLphilosop‘lijr` over sandwich-
es and a salad sprinkled path \’[QiD&l{bT“H- was just the two branches ol
. I,/r . - . .
_¤ govermrient reachmg-out, trying to keep the hncs oi communication
\ 1get1,Ysays‘l’Ct§ Steve Chabot of Ohio, vvho’s been highly critical ol`
p. /,/-·#"‘i {judges like O`Connor who he believes stray from a strict reading ofthe
X R Constitution. Another critic on thcjudiciary (ebminittee, Iowa Rep.
l`Sievc King, returned for his second visit. Last year he dined alone with
. \ t
~l i ‘ _ _$ . ·
W I ll. , j- ; -_
li . i = = E ·’ - ‘
l r I I ‘
J .
: I I · .
I`,}. ' . I
x{ ..
} I ir -
, /
J
2 Y f
yl / O`Connor alier a private. tour oi` the court. federal judges refused to intervene in the
J / Because thejustice could not talk about any ease ol"lerri Schiavo, Ilouse Majority l.ead-
L / s‘ eeilic eases-~or even controversial issues er'lbm DeI.av railed a rainst"a `udieiarv run
I , P _ . in J .
· ,/I that might come belore lter-—the convcrsa- arnok” and said judges in the case would
· _/I / tion had its limits. "We didn`t quite get to the have to "ansvrer for their hehavior." (I Ie later
I // ff THCHIOi-Ol1l'(llSCLlSSiOH,"Kl11{2;Zl(lI`i`lI[S.·‘lilIlLl[ apologized for his ullltllilllllii I'(`l`lIil`I`i(S.) .‘\t
/ ,» opened the dialogue? at recent \\’aslnngtnn eentl·rent—e, speakers
/.4/ / Theunusual privatcsessions suggest that tuised the notion o{"tnass iinpeaelunents"
` _/ / concern over the rising tide ol` anti-judge lor liberal judges. l·`oeus on the l·`amily
l /// [Y rhetoric has rocked even the Supreme Court. founder james Dobson compared black-
// // Though judges have been dragged into the rohed Supreme (`oun justices to white-
· fz /" culture wars heliirc, lately the animosity- rohed Ku Klux Klan members. liver since
Y /7 and a range of` new eflims to curb judicial the husband and mother ol`:1 federal judge
4..-/ _ power—hzue reached {ever pitch. Now with in Chicago were brutally murdered in tr
/// // the possibility ol`a vacancy on the Supreme February. judges have stepped up their re-
_ r/·“ Conn perhaps only weeks inlay, the stakes portingot`ile;_nh llll`Cl1i!·ii(}ilIL‘l.i.S. Marshals
,¤` and the vitriol are higher than ever. Vt-'lten Service, xvhieli protects them. \o\\ some QE.
__ ‘ i it PHDTIIILLUSTFIATIGNBYNEWSWEEK APE||_ 2§_ 2[]U5 NEWSWEEK
I. i

so ‘ ``‘‘ ` 5/`I7/2005 Pa c _ q , .. - P · ··
.J.us1ic.e.- .»-—-··r"' _ to it ,
•
judges are requesting increased security . -_ I‘ .
and canceling public appearances. ln a _ _
speech earlier this montlt at Goueher Col- .,_;·_‘:; _ . ,
lege, ()`Cotmor herself said she wassiir-` - i I E- II II
prisetl atnllthe yiolent threats she receivetL t` ' - I I I?
"I don`t think the harsh rhetoric helps," she .» " PI · 4 - _
told the crowd. “‘I think it energiws people J; · -· ·-sl .-
who arc a little o{l`hase to take agtions dia;
maybetheysmultlitlgtheruiisc take." "‘" " " · ``' _
I Criticizing judges is something of an - {-
American tradition. During Reconstruc- `I "";ZI
tion-—and again during the civil-riglits *9* I ‘i
era—some lawmakers tried unsuccessfully ' ,
to strip controversial issues lrom the courts` ·
control. In the late 1950s. conservatives , I
plastered ts11¤t=.~tcn rt-uu. uzttzasn bill- I ·
boards across the country, angry at a string -
ofeontroversial decisions on desegregation ·
and communism (Warren survived). ln the
1980s and `90s, liberal attacks on eonserva- . - = “
tive Supreme Court nominees like Rohert I’ s
Bork and Clarence Thomas spawned a new {ig ·
era of`political hostility. I ‘ Q; I_;.;é
{tmong cojtservatives, H·ustnttion with l i
_judgtIis—l"iiiis-Iliecn quietly liuilding for years. ii i
TilC}'COl"1tC[l(l[ll3t“G.lCI.i\'i5th_ll1(l{.]’LiS2l1'CC_[Q§L_ " `I ` I QI `
ing latysfrom bench. “'l`l1e courts are in- ’ . -_ ·
·- vol¤.·oil lTlC\’élL;’T.l’1llT1-t:';‘-:·`ii1iljI;i€h·i2`H'lil.J€)\'iI},\\'l'lOStI ’ ’ I , . ‘ ,. ,. _t.I
new hook "Menjn_Blat;k: l-low the Supreme . · t Iii
Coun ls Destroying America" became an in- FUEUNG THE FIRE _ gg I ;
I stantliest seller. "You haveone branclnoi`gov- PFOTGSTBFS lashed I ` I . Il` i:‘_I. ‘
eminentt.hat`sentirelyunaccountahle."lnthe 0LlTHTTl19lL|d§BSl¤ ‘ .. _ IEP;
. past fcwyeats alonehiudgeshaveirkcd social 'll1¤$Cl1lH\·‘0 ¤¤5¤ - `I `_ . ` , _ iY:Q`f·" ii .
eonsetvatircs with mlings on the words “un- I _, ; jc `AT; * `I; I'
l dcrGod"in the Pletlgeof`Allegiancc,gaymar· I I - ‘ ,?é_,_ I.
1iage,the'Ii:nCornmanclmcntsandso-called j · _ _ t _ j .·‘·
partial-birthabortion. Democratsin the Sen- ` __,; . ,_ r * . i II I
ate stonewalled Pre-sident George \\£ Bush`s _ `V I I I -. · ‘I
most conservative judicial nominees. And '
`_ thenjudges at all levels relitsed tointerrenein I 33**; Y . ’
--` __[l1CSClll2I\’ClCHS€—C\'€l"1Ellil.CTC)t)l1L;1'L’S.‘i passed J = Q, I ‘j, i
ia lawallowingthem todo so. Tliatkicked the i
`fight into_l;igh.,;;,§·,j£tr. Now, says Family Re- . * °‘ `
search C5IuntEilpi·iisTdent'lbr1)r Perkins, . I
sue ofjudgcs is so important to his members sentences~supportcd a proposal to give stitutional;.·\_rticle_lllgives Congress power ?‘-
`thnaitifsreplacedgayinaniageatthetopofhis judges discretion in sentencing low-level tolimitthecourts.lLastyearthegroupintro-
agenda. “Everyissuewe carecleeplyahouthas I_ drug dealers. llis position so angered Re- duced a resolution criticizingjudges lor cit-
theiingerprintsofjudgesonit,“he says. ._ Xpnblieaus on the panel that they tried to ing interngtipnal law Ltzheiiopiniqns-
The attacks are principled, not partisan. subpoena his records and threatened him sotnetltingjustiee Anthony Kennedy did in
_ f`oot_soldiersjn the new war on judges say; with impeaclunent. I-lc`s still on the bench. recent rulings striking down the juvenile .I
indeed, the arrows are aimed at_a_fetlentl Shortlyalterthe osenbaum case, Delay death penalty anti aTexas sodomy lZ·I\\’.i'l`ll.C
_ {s.__ judiciary tl1at_v.gLs_ largeljjisijeeted by helped organize thelljlouse Working Group resolution is likely to be reintrodueedIthis
"ii qmblican presidents. One pro1niiEi1TTarget;"· onjudieialAcoountaliiliity, a dozen-menmber year, as are proposals to keep courts from
\_;_ udgejames Rosenbaum, chiefjudge ofthe group that meets monthly. Its focus: strip- ruling on partial-birth abortion and the Fed-
Jl U.S. District Court in Minnesota. Called to ping the Federal courts of theirjurisdietion eral Defense of Marriage Act. So hir, some of
" testify before a House subcommittee in on sensitive matters like the Pledge ot"Alle- the measures have passed thellouse but HOL
— N 2002, Rosenbaum-a Reagan appointee gianoe and 'len Commandments. lt may the Senate. But the current atmosphere
\. with a reputation For handing down tough sound e>dreme, but supporters say it`s con- could change all that. “There`s a tradition ol`
‘I think it energizes people who are off base to take l’°"
` ’ ` ` ’ f th t` ` d 1‘ Ik
GCTIOIIS, SGICI JUSTICE 0 c0I`II10I" 0 G all l‘_|U gl} 3 .

24 uzwswzzu Apnn. 2s, 2005

Case 1:05-cv-00307-KAJ Document 2-4 Filed 05/17/2005 Page 3 of 3 F
Q .
‘£ 5;
/ ` »- `=, J.? .
3 3/ Ei; 2 AY
· 0/ ca su I
· C'
>
{I = ZT?
` 5 _ J ) .
ci Tx; 7% > ~@
; \ Q "" _ .
.. (-"* `
I ` _ \-..{
$ g *5 {\§ G g
§ 7m A Lg “ ’ U)
_g g Q **2 3 Q; F l 1: Sb
/ ,, —» {/J Mi
*“ ka ‘*
3 CD L5 EP
gv I y
D
MO ° % Eg
KQ Mx {P " K