A Radical Notion: Criteria

By August 11, 2005Judicial Nominations

Judicial NominationsIn the maelstrom that is the battle over Judge Roberts’ confirmation, the noise level gets so high as to almost be deafening. So many groups shoot from the hip (or the lip, as the case may be), based solely on the fact that he was nominated by President Bush.

You regular readers know all about our Judicial Review Committee (JRC), a group of lawyers from manufacturing companies who developed criteria by which we could judge a nominee and then evaluated Judge Roberts by these criteria. We were amazed yesterday at how many reporters were shocked to learn that we had criteria. Happily, most were pleasantly surprised. We handed them out at the press conference and posted them on our website.

For those of you who might have missed them in both places, here they are:

— The intellect, and ability and experience to understand and address complicated transactions and difficult legal problems;
Demonstrated fair-mindedness, impartiality, integrity, practicality, and judicial temperament;

— A commitment to applying the law rather than his or her own personal views, because the certainty provided by the rule of law is critical to making our nation and businesses prosperous;

— An understanding of the importance of clear rules, where consistent with the relevant provisions of the Constitution, duly enacted laws, or duly promulgated regulations;

— An understanding of the importance and practical consequences of decisions to business, with due regard for the importance of stability and certainty in fostering a healthy climate for business.

It is a measure of the seriousness with which the JRC undertook their task that they developed such solid criteria, guidelines that would withstand public scrutiny. Can’t say that about many groups who are in this fray.

Manufacturers, improving the process once again through metrics.