A vote on the nomination of Judge Janice Rogers Brown to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is coming up soon. Just so we are all aware, the D.C. Court is widely regarded as the second-most important court in America. More U.S. Supreme Court justices have come from this court than any other.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court grants certiorari in very few cases (relative to the requests they receive), the D.C. Court is often the final word on the legality of federal agency actions.

Here is a very brief snapshot of the record Brown has accumulated so far on the California Supreme Court.

She denied effective remedies to victims of unlawful discrimination in Konig v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission (2002) and Aguilar v. Avis Rent-a-Car (1999).

In Peatros v. Bank of America (1999), she barred civil rights claims to a defendant, claiming that federal banking laws pre-empt claims of bias on the basis of race and age.

Beyond that, Brown has also received the lowest possible passing rating from the American Bar Association: a “qualified/not qualified” rating.

According to a 1996 Los Angeles Times article, when Brown was nominated to the California Supreme Court, three-quarters of the California State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees ranked her “unqualified” for the position due to her lack of experience and her tendency to inject her own personal prejudices into her judicial opinions.

I urge all people with an interest in selecting qualified and balanced judges for one of our nation’s most important court circuits to contact Sen. Tom Harkin and Sen. Charles Grassley and encourage them to vote “no” on Brown’s nomination.

Dan Christenson

Graduate Student

Political Science