Lawyers, Judges, and Bears (OK, no bears)

Earlier this week, news came a sitting judge in St. Louis will release a book called "The Tyranny of Tolerance: A Sitting Judge Breaks the Code of Silence to Expose the Liberal Judicial Assault," excoriating liberals, "femifascists" (dude, don't you listen to Rush, it's "feminazis"), and the "secret judicial agenda" to turn everybody into a gay abortionist that uses the Bible for toilet paper, I guess. This is someone who is still hearing cases in St. Louis courts, and who still thinks he has the proper judicial temperament and independence to rule fairly.

Lawyers could cite the book as evidence that Dierker is unable to be impartial on issues involving women, or liberals, or the American Civil Liberties Union, for example, forcing his removal from cases.

Dierker responds that he is always fair in the courtroom, and paraphrases the book: "Conservative judges are much more likely to know where their biases are and how to draw the line."

Dierker could also face an inquiry from Missouri's Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline. Most of what the commission does is informal and secret. But the commission does have the power to recommend anything from a public reprimand to removal of the judge from office.

State Sen. Joan Bray, D-University City, filed a complaint with the commission last month, citing her concerns with the first chapter. Bray said, "I'm still worrying about women in Missouri being treated fairly in the courtroom." She said she plans a follow-up complaint, based on conversations with lawyers and judges, that would include a complaint that Dierker was violating judicial rules by using his position to promote the book.

If you're a judge in majority-Democratic St. Louis and you can't rule in cases involving women or liberals... how many cases a year can we expect out of you? 3?

So of course, this guy will probably get to keep his job. In fact, given who the Bush Administration nominates to the bench, he may be up for a promotion.

A Mississippi lawyer asked President Bush to withdraw his nomination to an appellate court, saying that he does not believe that the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee considers him a consensus nominee.

The lawyer, Michael B. Wallace, 54, of Jackson, said Tuesday that he made the request in a letter sent to the White House last week [...]

In February, Bush nominated Wallace, a former aide to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), to fill the seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit vacated more than a year ago by Judge Charles Pickering Sr., also a Mississippian. The New Orleans-based 5th Circuit hears cases from Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas.

In November, Wallace's name was among six judicial nominations that Bush resubmitted to the Senate.

Wallace drew opposition from Democrats, civil rights groups and the American Bar Association, which for the first time in almost a quarter-century unanimously rated a judicial nominee "unqualified."

This is par for the course among Bush appointments, as he seems to have a knack to find the most unqualified people for the position. In the case of the judiciary, however, he may have good reason to pack the courts with hacks and ideologues, because with the Democrats taking over Congress next week, a hard rain's gonna fall:

President Bush is bracing for what could be an onslaught of investigations by the new Democratic-led Congress by hiring lawyers to fill key White House posts and preparing to play defense on countless document requests and possible subpoenas.
Bush is moving quickly to fill vacancies within his stable of lawyers, though White House officials say there are no plans to drastically expand the legal staff to deal with a flood of oversight. . . .

in the days after the elections, the White House announced that Bush had hired two replacements to plug holes in his counsel's office, including one lawyer, Christopher G. Oprison, who is a specialist in handling white-collar investigations. A third hire was securities law specialist Paul R. Eckert, whose duties include dealing with the Office of the Special Counsel. Bush is in the process of hiring a fourth associate counsel, said Emily A. Lawrimore, a White House spokeswoman [...]

"They just think it's inevitable that there will be some investigations that will tie up some time and attention," said Charles Black, a strategist with close ties to the White House. But there's no panic in the ranks of Bush's team, he added. "They don't think they have anything to hide."

If they had nothing to hide, they wouldn't be scrambling to hire every lawyer with an R on his voter registration card. The White House is clearly terrified. I'll bet the shredders will be running on overdrive right up until January 3. And the call for more unqualified judges to adjudicate them must be going out nationwide. I think there's a guy in St. Louis who can send in a book as his résumé...