Print
E-mail
Specter Backs Ogden For Deputy Attorney General
 |
| Former Sen. John Warner, R-Va., shakes hands with David Ogden, nominated by President Barack Obama to be deputy attorney general at the Justice Department, at Mr. Ogden’s Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Feb. 5. (Roger L. Wollenberg/UPI) |
Vote Set For Today
By Chris Freind, The Bulletin
The U.S. Senate engaged in a floor debate yesterday regarding the controversial confirmation vote of David Ogden as deputy attorney general. Mr. Ogden’s nomination has come under fire because of his legal work on behalf of the porn industry, as well as his efforts to weaken abortion laws. The Senate vote is expected today.
Mr. Ogden’s nomination was sent to the full Senate after winning approval in the Judiciary Committee by a 14-5 margin.
U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., is the ranking minority member on the committee. Despite the Judiciary Committee receiving 11,000 calls urging the rejection of Mr. Ogden, Mr. Specter voted to send the nomination to the floor, and stated he would vote to confirm the nominee.
“My net conclusion is that he ought to be confirmed,” Mr. Specter said. “I say that based upon a resume that is very strong, both academically and professionally. Then there is the consideration that the president is entitled to select his appointees within broad limits. The deputy attorney general, while important, is not a lifetime appointment as a judge,” he said.
Mr. Specter also expressed concerns the attorney general did not have any deputies at the Department of Justice (DOJ), which has been functioning for nearly two months.
Another of Mr. Specter’s considerations is his view that a lawyer should not necessarily be held accountable for his client’s beliefs.
“[Some of] the objections raised call into focus the issue asto whether an attorney ought to be judged on the basis of arguments he has made in the representation of a client,” Mr. Specter said. “I believe it is accurate to say that the prevailing view is not to bind someone to those arguments.
Mr. Specter cited an article authored by two former Justice Department officials who served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush that advances the thesis that a lawyer is not necessarily expressing his own views when he represents a client.
Many opponents of the Ogden nomination expressed outrage that someone with a porn industry background would even be considered for the second highest post in the Department of Justice.
“No one who has devoted a career advocating for the ‘right’ of individuals, including pedophiles, to purchase and possess child pornography can be trusted with the responsibility of protecting children and families or prosecuting criminals generally. Yet President Obama has made that choice in
nominating David Ogden,” Family Research Council (FRC) Action President Tony Perkins said in a statement.
The FRC stated its intention include the senate vote on the Ogden nomination in its annual Vote
Scorecard, which tracks votes in Congress relating to family issues.
“We will make every effort to inform the American people how each of their two Senators voted on this far left nomination,” said Mr. Perkins.
A former Justice Department official explained why the Ogden nomination has been so controversial. “Mr. Ogden has not just represented major pornographers in prominent cases. He has been a leader in an effort to get courts to proclaim greater protections for pornography and pornographers,” said Pat Trueman, now an attorney in private practice in Virginia.
Mr. Trueman stressed that Mr. Ogden “volunteered to represent plaintiffs challenging the Children’s Internet Protection Act,” (CIPA) which was designed to protect children by keeping pornography from school and public library computers.
According to Mr. Trueman, Ogden insisted that the Congress acted “unconstitutionally” when it passed CIPA. “Children should not be exposed to pornography in schools and libraries. Yet David Ogden believes the Constitution requires it.”
Michael Geer, president of the Pennsylvania Family Institute (PFI) in Harrisburg, has been urging Pennsylvania’s senators to vote against the Ogden nomination. The institute’s website cited a number of reasons why PFI opposed Mr. Ogden.
“As an attorney in private practice, David Ogden has filed briefs for virtually unlimited abortion license, including opposing Pennsylvania’s informed consent law and against laws requiring parental consent for minors seeking abortions. He pushed for gays in the military. And he filed briefs that claim 14 and 15 year-olds are fully mature enough to decide to have an abortion, but 17 and 18 year-olds are not mature enough to be held fully responsible for decisions to commit murder,” Mr. Geer’s Web site stated.
Additionally, PFI pointed out that Mr. Ogden worked to promote Oregon’s law permitting physician-assisted suicide, and that he has, on numerous occasions, gone to court to defend pornographers.
The organization says Mr. Ogden represented the American Library Association in opposing laws requiring obscenity filters on library and school computers. He also challenged the Child Protection and Obscenity Act of 1988, claiming it was too burdensome to require pornographers to verify that their “models” were over 18 as they produce porn films and photos.
The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins urged all senators to “vote no” on Mr. Ogden. “The American people deserve a Justice Department that will aggressively prosecute those who violate our laws, not someone who has sought to defend and justify some of the most despicable people in our country,” said
Mr. Trueman, the former DOJ official, said he didn’t think President Obama nominated Mr. Ogden to “help” pornographers. “I think he just doesn’t care,” he said. “One would think that Ogden’s past work would eliminate him from consideration. After all, the overwhelming majority of the public must still oppose child pornography and want children protected from pornography in public libraries.”
He added, “it seems that our president just doesn’t care what people think as long as his core group of left-leaning supporters — and that includes more than half the U.S. Senate — support him.”
Mr. Specter concluded his remarks by stating:
“I think those who have raised objections have done so, obviously, in good faith. They are entitled to have their objections considered and to know that the Judiciary Committee is giving very careful analysis to their facts and will do so on the consideration of other nominees.”
Chris Freind can be reached at cf@thebulletin.us
Mr. Ogden’s nomination was sent to the full Senate after winning approval in the Judiciary Committee by a 14-5 margin.
U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., is the ranking minority member on the committee. Despite the Judiciary Committee receiving 11,000 calls urging the rejection of Mr. Ogden, Mr. Specter voted to send the nomination to the floor, and stated he would vote to confirm the nominee.
“My net conclusion is that he ought to be confirmed,” Mr. Specter said. “I say that based upon a resume that is very strong, both academically and professionally. Then there is the consideration that the president is entitled to select his appointees within broad limits. The deputy attorney general, while important, is not a lifetime appointment as a judge,” he said.
Mr. Specter also expressed concerns the attorney general did not have any deputies at the Department of Justice (DOJ), which has been functioning for nearly two months.
Another of Mr. Specter’s considerations is his view that a lawyer should not necessarily be held accountable for his client’s beliefs.
“[Some of] the objections raised call into focus the issue asto whether an attorney ought to be judged on the basis of arguments he has made in the representation of a client,” Mr. Specter said. “I believe it is accurate to say that the prevailing view is not to bind someone to those arguments.
Mr. Specter cited an article authored by two former Justice Department officials who served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush that advances the thesis that a lawyer is not necessarily expressing his own views when he represents a client.
Many opponents of the Ogden nomination expressed outrage that someone with a porn industry background would even be considered for the second highest post in the Department of Justice.
“No one who has devoted a career advocating for the ‘right’ of individuals, including pedophiles, to purchase and possess child pornography can be trusted with the responsibility of protecting children and families or prosecuting criminals generally. Yet President Obama has made that choice in
nominating David Ogden,” Family Research Council (FRC) Action President Tony Perkins said in a statement.
The FRC stated its intention include the senate vote on the Ogden nomination in its annual Vote
Scorecard, which tracks votes in Congress relating to family issues.
“We will make every effort to inform the American people how each of their two Senators voted on this far left nomination,” said Mr. Perkins.
A former Justice Department official explained why the Ogden nomination has been so controversial. “Mr. Ogden has not just represented major pornographers in prominent cases. He has been a leader in an effort to get courts to proclaim greater protections for pornography and pornographers,” said Pat Trueman, now an attorney in private practice in Virginia.
Mr. Trueman stressed that Mr. Ogden “volunteered to represent plaintiffs challenging the Children’s Internet Protection Act,” (CIPA) which was designed to protect children by keeping pornography from school and public library computers.
According to Mr. Trueman, Ogden insisted that the Congress acted “unconstitutionally” when it passed CIPA. “Children should not be exposed to pornography in schools and libraries. Yet David Ogden believes the Constitution requires it.”
Michael Geer, president of the Pennsylvania Family Institute (PFI) in Harrisburg, has been urging Pennsylvania’s senators to vote against the Ogden nomination. The institute’s website cited a number of reasons why PFI opposed Mr. Ogden.
“As an attorney in private practice, David Ogden has filed briefs for virtually unlimited abortion license, including opposing Pennsylvania’s informed consent law and against laws requiring parental consent for minors seeking abortions. He pushed for gays in the military. And he filed briefs that claim 14 and 15 year-olds are fully mature enough to decide to have an abortion, but 17 and 18 year-olds are not mature enough to be held fully responsible for decisions to commit murder,” Mr. Geer’s Web site stated.
Additionally, PFI pointed out that Mr. Ogden worked to promote Oregon’s law permitting physician-assisted suicide, and that he has, on numerous occasions, gone to court to defend pornographers.
The organization says Mr. Ogden represented the American Library Association in opposing laws requiring obscenity filters on library and school computers. He also challenged the Child Protection and Obscenity Act of 1988, claiming it was too burdensome to require pornographers to verify that their “models” were over 18 as they produce porn films and photos.
The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins urged all senators to “vote no” on Mr. Ogden. “The American people deserve a Justice Department that will aggressively prosecute those who violate our laws, not someone who has sought to defend and justify some of the most despicable people in our country,” said
Mr. Trueman, the former DOJ official, said he didn’t think President Obama nominated Mr. Ogden to “help” pornographers. “I think he just doesn’t care,” he said. “One would think that Ogden’s past work would eliminate him from consideration. After all, the overwhelming majority of the public must still oppose child pornography and want children protected from pornography in public libraries.”
He added, “it seems that our president just doesn’t care what people think as long as his core group of left-leaning supporters — and that includes more than half the U.S. Senate — support him.”
Mr. Specter concluded his remarks by stating:
“I think those who have raised objections have done so, obviously, in good faith. They are entitled to have their objections considered and to know that the Judiciary Committee is giving very careful analysis to their facts and will do so on the consideration of other nominees.”
Chris Freind can be reached at cf@thebulletin.us
 |
 |
|
| Afghan-Bound Troops Face Two Difficulties: Drugs And Terrorists | Poll: Obama's Negatives Are On The Rise |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
