Senate needs to reject Judge David Hamilton
Barack Obama's first nominee to be on the federal circuit court of appeals, David Hamilton, who is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, needs to be defeated. He was nominated to be a judge on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hamilton was given a "Not Qualified" rating by the liberal American Bar Association in 1994 when Bill Clinton nominated him to be a federal district judge. Hamilton is even more unqualified to be a federal appeals judge and Senators should vote no on his nomination.
Hamilton is a former ACLU board member whose voting record as a federal district judge mirrors that fact. Indeed, in 2005, when the ACLU brought a lawsuit before him, Hamilton ruled that the Indiana state legislature could not begin their sessions with Christian prayers. His decision, which was overruled by an appeals court, dictated that invocations could not use names such as Jesus Christ or "savior." He is too radical to be confirmed by the Senate."
David Hamilton's judicial rulings favored criminals such as in the case in which he struck down a part of an Illinois law which would have forced registered sex offenders to notify authorities of their email addresses and user names. This radical judge was reprimanded by an appeals court after he ruled against Indiana's informed consent law on abortion. Barack Obama must not be allowed to turn the federal judiciary into his own image.
***
TAKE ACTION: Contact your Senators and tell them to reject Judge Hamilton. Click here for phone and email contact. Or click here to send them a personalized online fax today!
- Capitol Notebook's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Report this page
- Email this page
Most recent items
Get Connected!
Get our Daily Update via email:
Recent Comments
- Deans337
- Deans337
- coffmanrm
- R.Marshall
- sj73008
- Deans337
- Deans337
- l3indy1947
- l3indy1947
- Deans337
- Deans337
- Deans337
- leonardzz










Comments
How is the American Bar
How is the American Bar Association liberal? I thought the ABA was liberal based on their views of tort reform. It has nothing to do with Christian Values from what I understand. Why did the ABA find him to be unqualified? Understanding of why the ABA found him to be unqualified would give greater value to your blog.
How is the ABA liberal? Is
How is the ABA liberal? Is like asking if the sky is blue. I am not insulting your question, only stating the obvious. No one thinks of Labor Unions as being Republican controlled. Unions and the ABA have conservatives within their ranks, but not many. The point of the "not Qualified" implies his inability to meet the threshold of his own group. Simply stated the, "Gold Standard" of the ABA and Senate is a red herring if you are a liberal. The "Gold Standard" only applies if you are a conservative. This judge is way out in the "outer limits" as it relates to judicial activism of the party currently in control of the U.S. Government.