Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

�� Judge, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals since May 30, 1991. Appointed by President George Bush. �� Previously served as a judge in U.S. District Court for Western District of Texas; appointed in 1988 by President Ronald Reagan. Earlier, he was a Texas state court judge and lawyer in private practice. �� J.D., University of Texas School of Law, 1976. �� Born in San Antonio. �� From a concurrence in Causeway Medical Suite v. Ieyoub, April 14, 1997: “Some … judicial decisions, such as invalidating statutes that discriminate based on race, reflect our nation’s highest aspirations as an individualist, pluralist society. Nonetheless, judicial officers should not force the pace of change nor bind the nation to wise policy using loose interpretations of our written Constitution. Neither our aspirations about privacy, nor our concerns about the consequences of leaving certain matters for states to decide, invests us with the authority to nullify state law. Article III courts should not cloak political choices with claims that those choices are required by the Due Process Clause… . “In part because of the Supreme Court’s ambiguity about the scope of substantive due process, it is unclear to me that the Court itself still believes that abortion is a ‘fundamental right’ under the Fourteenth Amendment… . For the purposes of this opinion, it is necessary only to point out that the Court’s more recent decisions indicate tepid support for Roe v. Wade. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Court in a fractured joint opinion upheld Roe‘s ‘central holding,’ but did not defend Roe as a sound reading of the Constitution. Instead, it upheld Roe out of concerns for the abstract, nonconstitutional value of stare decisis, for the institutional credibility of the Court, and because of the primacy of settled expectations about constitutional law.” ALBERTO GONZALES, AGE 45

�� Justice, Texas Supreme Court since Jan. 11, 1999; appointed by Gov. George W. Bush. �� J.D., Harvard Law School, 1982. �� Born in San Antonio, Texas. �� Previously served as Texas secretary of state and general counsel to Bush. �� Ruling for the Texas Supreme Court in Southwestern Refining Co. v. Bernal, May 11, 2000: “The class action is a procedural device intended to advance judicial economy by trying claims together that lend themselves to collective treatment. It is not meant to alter the parties’ burdens of proof, right to a jury trial, or the substantive prerequisites to recovery under a given tort. Procedural devices may ‘not be construed to enlarge or diminish any substantive rights or obligations of any parties to any civil action.’ … Although a goal of our system is to resolve lawsuits with ‘great expedition and dispatch and at the least expense,’ the supreme objective of the courts is ‘to obtain a just, fair, equitable, and impartial adjudication of the rights of litigants under established principles of substantive law.’ … This means that ‘convenience and economy must yield to a paramount concern for a fair and impartial trial.’ “ POSSIBLE GORE APPOINTEES JOSE CABRANES, AGE 59

�� Judge, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals since Aug. 10, 1994; appointed by President Bill Clinton. �� Previously was a judge in U.S. District Court in Connecticut; appointed in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter. Earlier served as special counsel to the governor of Puerto Rico and as general counsel of Yale University. �� J.D., Yale Law School, 1965. �� Born in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico �� From “Fear of Judging: Sentencing Guidelines in the Federal Courts,” a 1998 book critical of federal sentencing policy, co-written with his wife, Kate Stith: “In a world in which discretion cannot be avoided — because justice must be administered by human beings — we must learn once again to trust the exercise of judgment in the courtroom, especially where it is subject to review by appellate courts. Fed by a fear of the exercise of discretion — a fear of judging — and by a technocratic faith in experts and central planning, the federal sentencing reforms of the 1980s sought to relocate authority from individual sentencing judges to a distant administrative tribunal of experts not influenced by the particulars of each case at hand… . In sentencing, as in other human affairs, no mechanical solution can satisfy the demands of justice.” FORTUNATO “PETE” BENAVIDES, AGE 53

�� Judge, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals since Jan. 27, 1994; appointed by President Bill Clinton. �� Previously, he was a judge on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, then went into private practice. �� J.D., University of Houston Law Center, 1972. �� Born in Mission, Texas. �� From a dissent in Calvin Burdine v. Gary Johnson, Oct. 27, 2000: “It is well-established that a defendant ‘requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings against him.’ I conclude that being represented by counsel who slept through substantial portions of a client’s capital murder trial violates the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and, thus, Burdine should be entitled to a new trial with the benefit of counsel who does not sleep during substantial portions of his trial. In my opinion, it shocks the conscience that a defendant could be sentenced to death under the circumstances surrounding counsel’s representation of Burdine … . To me, once we have accepted as presumptively correct the state court’s finding that counsel slept ‘during portions of [Burdine's] trial on the merits, in particular during the guilt-innocence phase when the State’s solo prosecutor was questioning witnesses and presenting evidence,’ there is no need to attempt to further scrutinize the record.”

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.