2019年12月19日，DC华盛顿，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普抵达白宫，在白宫艾森豪威尔行政办公楼南法庭礼堂举行的白宫精神健康峰会上发表演讲。一份新报告揭示了总统在其任期的头三年是如何重塑联邦司法机构的。
一份全面的新报告显示，唐纳德·特朗普总统的巡回法院提名者中有超过三分之一的人有歧视同性恋、双性恋和变性者的历史记录，该报告说明了总统无视法官评级以及保守派重塑司法机构的努力可能对联邦法院系统产生持久影响。
报告作者说，倡导男女同性恋、双性恋和变性者权利的非营利组织拉姆达法律(Lambda Legal)提出了这样一个问题，即那些展示或表达了反对男女同性恋、双性恋和变性者平等观点的被提名者是否能够对男女同性恋、双性恋和变性者诉讼当事人保持公正，尤其是在同性恋和跨性别民权案件日益突出的情况下。
“这只是煤矿里的金丝雀，”拉姆达法律公司的高级律师萨莎·布切特告诉记者新闻周刊。“我们看到的这些被提名者不仅反对同性恋、双性恋和变性者的保护，还反对普遍的公民权利。我们不会因为人们的隶属关系而反对他们，但令人不安的是，他们都在读同一本书。”
巡回法院是联邦案件的上诉法院，在司法体系中仅次于最高法院。或许最必然的结果是，对于最高法院拒绝审理其案件的数以千计的诉讼当事人来说，这些法院往往是“最后的法院”，让巡回法院法官的意见成为最终的裁决。巡回法院的被提名人，就像几乎所有由总统任命的联邦法官一样，终身任职，只有在退休、死亡、辞职或弹劾时才能被免职。
“我们经常听到过道另一边的人谈论这只是一个律师在做他的工作，代表他的客户，”布切特说。“但我们期待的是他们的记录和个人陈述，以确定他们无法提供公正的司法。”
参议院迄今已确认50名特朗普巡回法院提名人，约占巡回法院约170名法官的三分之一。据拉姆达法律公司称，仅在为阿拉巴马州、佛罗里达州和佐治亚州3600万居民服务的第十一巡回法庭，特朗普就提名了42%的法官。
周五的报告中提到的法官中有劳伦斯·万迪克(Lawrence VanDyke)，他是第九巡回法庭的一名即将上任的成员，也是特朗普的最新法官之一，尽管有反对同性恋者、双性恋者和变性者观点的记录，或者反对拉姆达法律确定的同性恋者、双性恋者和变性者平等，但他还是在参议院获得了确认。
第九巡回上诉法院发言人没有回应置评请求。
范德基是哈佛法学院的二年级法律学生，他写了一篇专栏文章，指出有理由相信同性婚姻“伤害家庭，进而伤害孩子和社会”
在2010年提交给最高法院的法庭之友简报中，范德基认为，想要排除同性恋、双性恋和变性者成员的大学校园团体受到第一修正案结社自由保护。
美国无党派律师协会(ABA)采取了罕见的步骤，警告参议院司法委员会，在评估范代克的联邦法官候选人资格时，有人担心“范代克先生是否会对男同性恋者、女同性恋者或男女同性恋者群体的其他成员公平”。
“范代克的成就被受访者的评估抵消了，受访者认为范代克傲慢、懒惰、是一个理论家，并且不了解包括程序规则在内的日常实践，”美国律师协会在范代克确认之前的信中表示。“有一个主题是，被提名者缺乏谦逊，具有‘应得的’气质，没有开放的心态，并不总是承诺坦诚和真实。”
当在听证会上被问及美国律师协会的评估时，范迪克哭了起来。他否认会基于当事人的性取向或性别认同不公平地对待他们。
“我的一个基本信念是，所有人都是按照上帝的形象创造的，”他说。"他们都应该得到尊严和尊重。"
美国律师协会最终给范德基提供了不合格的评级，这是联邦法官候选人能够得到的最低评级。
根据拉姆达法律公司的一项新分析，妮欧米·拉奥于2019年2月5日在华盛顿特区国会山的参议院司法确认听证会上作证，该听证会现已向哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院确认，此前表达的观点表明存在反同性恋、双性恋和变性者的偏见。
虽然美国律师协会只反对特朗普的少数提名人，但总统寻求此类确认打破了先例。这份名为“特朗普对同性恋者、双性恋者和变性者保护的司法攻击”的报告显示，在过去30年里，特朗普是唯一一位提名并确认评级不合格的巡回法院法官的总统。除了范德基(VanDyke)之外，总统巡回法院的另外两名被参议院确认的被提名者被评为不合格，在过去30年中获得这一评级的所有联邦法官中，将近一半是特朗普提名的。
报告中提到的另一名法官，特朗普提名的内奥米·拉奥，被任命为上诉法院法官布雷特·卡瓦纳夫(Brett Kavanaugh)的席位。
作为耶鲁大学的本科生，拉奥为《耶鲁先驱报》写了一篇专栏文章，指出“时髦”的运动“将性添加到了要求宽容的标准特征清单中”
她写道:“因为同性恋不同于性别和种族，它是一种社会不可接受的行为，所以许多同性恋者以激进的方式回应了正常生活的要求。”。"他们不仅想要平等的权利，而且更为根本地努力改变文化和社会。"
拉奥也因为她的早期作品而面临批评，这些作品似乎暗示性攻击的受害者可能要承担一些责任。
“强奸醉酒女孩的男人应该被起诉，”她在另一篇专栏文章中说。"同时，避免潜在约会强奸的一个好方法是保持清醒."
哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院的一名代表没有回复置评请求，但拉奥公开为自己在司法环境中保持公正的能力辩护。
当参议员科里·布克在听证会上就她对同性恋者、双性恋者和变性者的看法提出质疑时，当被问及她是否认为同性恋关系不道德时，拉奥回答说“不”。
“参议员，我对这些问题的个人观点是我会放在一边的，”她说。“无论我个人对这个问题有什么看法，我都会忠实地遵循最高法院的先例。
“我带着人们来，”她补充道。“不管他们的种族、民族、性取向如何，我都将人视为个体。这些是我成长的价值观，如果得到证实，我会应用这些价值观。”
美国律师协会最终将她评为合格，是该组织最强有力的支持。
拉姆达法律还展示了特朗普白宫、参议院多数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔(Mitch McConnell)和联邦主义者协会(Federalist Society)等组织如何广泛地重塑联邦法官席，以及参议院传统主义者的确认程序如何被改变以允许他们这样做。
拉姆达法律公司的法律总监莎伦·麦高恩说:“谈到法官，我们看到的是20年、30年或40年的影响，这将远远超出本届政府的任期。”新闻周刊。“法院的完整性面临风险，而且这种潜在伤害的时间太长了。”
参议院多数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔(R-KY)于2019年12月19日从办公室走到位于华盛顿特区美国国会大厦的参议院会议厅，麦康奈尔被认为在特朗普执政期间帮助加快了司法确认的步伐。
由于参议院对特朗普提名人采取权宜之计，仅在2019年，白宫就成功地将巡回法院系统的四分之一从多数民主党任命的法官转变为多数共和党任命的法官。这三条赛道覆盖了从新罕布什尔州到德克萨斯州的九个州。
今年4月，参议院共和党人在参议院以微弱多数票通过了所谓的核选项，并将地区法院法官的辩论时间从最初分配给每位法官30小时的时间缩短至仅两小时。
放弃长达一个世纪的“蓝滑”进程也削弱了民主党少数派在参议院确认过程中影响特朗普提名人的能力。
尽管特朗普对巡回法院的影响仅从数量上看是显而易见的，但这些法官的背景也受到了更多的审视。拉姆达法律公司发现，超过85%的被提名者是联邦主义者协会的成员，联邦主义者协会是一个有影响力的保守法律组织，报告显示，它帮助特朗普确定了任命名单。
最终，该报告旨在说明，尽管被提名者在确认听证期间保证不偏不倚，但他们是否有某些联系或表达了某些观点为何至关重要。
麦高恩说:“我对一些被提名者没有信心，穿上长袍的行为会给他们灌输公正对待所有人的更高目标。”。
然而，她表达了一点希望，即联邦法官的生活现实可能会激发一些温和，尤其是当过去的著作显示出更强硬的信仰时。
她说:“我认为肯定有一些被提名者承认他们以前作品的错误，并认识到这些年来他们的观点变得更加明智。”。“司法部门仍在努力解决男女同性恋、双性恋和变性者的问题，我们需要继续努力解释为什么让男女同性恋、双性恋和变性者过上充实、平等的生活符合所有其他宪法保障。”
WITH NEW APPOINTMENTS, MORE THAN ONE-THIRD OF TRUMP APPEALS JUDGES HAVE RECORD OF ANTI-LGBT BIAS
U.S. President Donald Trump arrives to speak at a White House Mental Health Summit in the South Court Auditorium of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building at the White House on December 19, 2019 in Washington, DC. A new report is shedding light on how the president has managed to reshape the federal judiciary during the first three years of his presidency.
More than one-third of President Donald Trump's circuit court nominees have a documented history of bias against LGBT people, according to a sweeping new report that illustrates how the president's disregard of judges' ratings as well as conservatives' efforts to reshape the judiciary may have an enduring impact on the federal court system.
The report by Lambda Legal, a non-profit organization that advocates for LGBT rights, raised questions about whether nominees who have demonstrated or expressed opinions adverse to LGBT equality will be able to be impartial toward LGBT litigants, particularly as gay and trans civil rights cases become increasingly prominent, the authors said.
"This is just the canary in the coal mine," Sasha Buchert, a senior attorney with Lambda Legal, told Newsweek. "These are nominees that we're seeing who are not just inimical to LGBT protections but to civil rights generally. We don't oppose people based on their affiliation, but it's troubling that they're all reading from the same playbook."
Circuit courts are the courts of appeals for federal cases, sitting just below the Supreme Court in the hierarchy in the judiciary. And perhaps most consequentially, these courts are often the 'court of last resort' for any of the thousands of litigants whose cases the Supreme Court declines to hear, leaving the circuit court judges' opinions as the final word. The circuit court nominees, as with nearly all federal judges appointed by the president, serve for a lifetime and can only be removed from the bench upon their retirement, death, resignation or impeachment.
"We often hear folks on the other side of the aisle talking about how this is just a lawyer doing his job, representing his client," Buchert said. "But it's their record and personal statements we looked to in order to determine they're not going to be able to provide impartial justice."
The Senate so far has confirmed 50 Trump circuit court nominees, or about one-third of the approximately 170 judges serving at the circuit court level. In the Eleventh Circuit alone, which serves 36 million residents in Alabama, Florida and Georgia, 42 percent of the bench was nominated by Trump, according to Lambda Legal.
Among the judges noted in Friday's report is Lawrence VanDyke, a forthcoming member of the Ninth Circuit and one of Trump's newest judges, who achieved confirmation in the Senate despite a record of anti-LGBT views or of opposing LGBT equality as determined by Lambda Legal.
A spokesperson for the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit did not respond to a request for comment.
While VanDyke was a second-year law student at Harvard Law School, he penned an op-ed suggesting there was cause to believe that same-sex marriages "hurt families, and consequentially children and society."
And in a 2010 amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court, VanDyke argued that college campus groups who want to exclude LGBT members were shielded by the First Amendment's freedom-of-association protections.
The non-partisan American Bar Association (ABA) took the rare step of warning the Senate Judiciary Committee that there were concerns "about whether Mr. VanDyke would be fair to persons who are gay, lesbian, or otherwise part of the LGBTQ community" in its evaluation of his candidacy for the federal bench.
"Mr. VanDyke's accomplishments are offset by the assessments of interviewees that Mr. VanDyke is arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice including procedural rules," the ABA said in its letter ahead of VanDyke's confirmation. "There was a theme that the nominee lacks humility, has an 'entitlement' temperament, does not have an open mind, and does not always have a commitment to being candid and truthful."
When asked about the ABA's assessment during his confirmation hearing, VanDyke broke down into tears. He denied that he would treat litigants unfairly based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
"It is a fundamental belief of mine that all people are created in the image of God," he said. "They should all be treated with dignity and respect."
The ABA ultimately provided VanDyke with a rating of not qualified, the lowest rating a nominee for the federal bench can receive.
Neomi Rao testifies during a Senate Judiciary confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on February 5, 2019 in Washington, D.C. Rao, now confirmed to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, previously expressed views indicating anti-LGBT bias, according to a new analysis from Lambda Legal.
While the ABA has objected to only a few of Trump's nominees, the president's pursuit of such confirmations breaks with precedent. In the past 30 years, Trump is the only president to have nominated and confirmed circuit court judges with a not qualified rating, the report, called "Trump's Judicial Assault on LGBT Protections," showed. Besides VanDyke, two other of the president's circuit court nominees who were confirmed by the Senate have been rated not qualified, and nearly half of all federal judges to have received this rating in the last 30 years were nominated by Trump.
Another judge named in the report, Trump nominee Neomi Rao, was appointed to the court of appeals seat that had been held by Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
As an undergraduate student at Yale University, Rao wrote a column for The Yale Herald observing that "trendy" movements had "added sexuality to the standard checklist of traits requiring tolerance."
"Because homosexuality, unlike gender and race, concerns a socially unacceptable activity, many gays have responded to the demands of normalcy in radical ways," she wrote. "They want not only equal rights, but they struggle more fundamentally to alter culture and society."
Rao also faced criticism for her early writings which appeared to suggest victims of sexual assault might bear some culpability.
"A man who rapes a drunk girl should be prosecuted," she said in another column. "At the same time, a good way to avoid a potential date rape is to stay reasonably sober."
A representative for the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit did not return a request for comment, but Rao has publicly defended her ability to remain impartial in judicial settings.
When pressed by Senator Cory Booker during her confirmation hearing about her views towards LGBT people, Rao replied "no" when asked whether she thinks gay relationships are immoral.
"Senator, my personal views on any of these subjects are things I would put to one side," she said. "Whatever my personal views are on this subject, I would faithfully follow the precedents of the Supreme Court.
"I take people as they come," she added. "Irrespective of their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, I treat people as individuals. Those are the values that I grew up with, and those are the values I would apply if confirmed."
The ABA ultimately rated her well qualified, the organization's strongest endorsement.
Lambda Legal also illustrated how extensively the Trump White House, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and organizations such as the Federalist Society have been able to remake the federal bench and how the Senate's traditionalist confirmation process has been altered to allow them to do so.
"When it comes to judges, we're looking at 20, 30 or 40 years of impact that will extend far beyond however long this administration lasts," Sharon McGowan, Lambda Legal's legal director, told Newsweek. "There's a risk to the integrity of the courts, and the length of time that there is this potential for harm to be done is so long."
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) walks from his office to the Senate chamber at the U.S. Capitol December 19, 2019 in Washington, D.C. McConnell has been credited with helping to expedite the pace of judicial confirmations during the Trump administration.
Because of expedient Senate action on Trump nominees, the White House has managed to flip one-quarter of the circuit court system from majority-Democrat-appointed judges to majority-Republican-appointed judges in 2019 alone. These three circuits cover nine states from New Hampshire to Texas.
In April, Senate Republicans led a slim majority vote in the Senate to invoke the so-called nuclear option and reduce debate time for district court judges to a mere two hours, from the original allotted time of 30 hours per judge.
The abandonment of the century-old blue slip process also has reduced the Democratic minority's ability to influence the advancement of Trump nominees within the Senate's confirmation process.
And while Trump's influence on the circuit courts is apparent through sheer numbers alone, the affiliations of these judges are also garnering additional scrutiny. Lambda Legal has found that more than 85 percent of these nominees are members of the Federalist Society, an influential conservative legal organization that reports show has helped determine Trump's roster of appointments.
Ultimately, the report aims to demonstrate why it matters whether nominees have certain affiliations or have expressed certain views, notwithstanding their assurances of impartiality during confirmation hearings.
"I'm not confident for some of the nominees that the act of putting on the robe will instill in them the higher purpose of doing justice to all," McGowan said.
However, she expressed an inkling of hope that the realities of life on the federal bench may inspire some moderation, especially when past writings have evinced more hardline beliefs.
"I think there are certainly some nominees who acknowledged the error of their prior writings and recognized that their views had become more informed over the years," she said. "The judiciary still is grappling with LGBT issues and we're going to need to continue to do the work to explain why it is compatible with all of the other constitutional guarantees to have LGBT people live full, equal lives."
