The dispute over judicial nominations centers on seven nominees for federal district and appellate courts. The nominees include the following:

• David McKeague of Michigan blocked a Justice Department investigation of possible abuses of females at two state prisons, even when several other courts allowed the investigation. It was the first time in more that a decade that the department was not granted a review by the federal district court. In Northwood Wilderness Recovery, Inc. v. U.S. Forest Service, an appellate court reversed a McKeague ruling that permitted a logging and clear-cutting project by the Forest Service without environmental analysis. The appellate court made its unanimous decision and called McKeague's ruling "arbitrary and capricious."

• Priscilla Owen showed in her Texas Supreme Court decisions a favoritism toward corporations like Enron and Dow Chemical, which underwrote her judicial campaign, according to some senators. Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat from Vermont, has written that Owen's "rulings favored the interests of big business over ordinary people." Even U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was critical of Owen when the two shared the Texas high court bench, particularly in Montgomery Independent School District v. Davis, saying she disregarded the law.

• Henry Saad of Michigan wrote the majority opinion in a 2-1 ruling for Helder v. Sruba. The vote reversed a trial court's decision in support of a woman who had been repeatedly beaten by her former boyfriend when he was inebriated at the bar that he owned. The woman had sought $100,000 from the bar's insurance company in accordance with Michigan statutes. The Michigan Supreme Court unanimously overturned the Saad decision, saying the statute was "clear and unambiguous" and should have been applied. Other cases have brought into question whether Saad misinterprets laws to the benefit of companies. A court of appeals in Haberl v. Rose was critical of Saad for that reason, saying his interpretation "requires reading language into the statutes that is not there and impermissibly steps into legislative territory."

-AG

This article appears in May 4-10, 2005.