Patrick Leahy: “Thank you. But the reason we say this, if this work is what qualifies him, then we ought to know what he did in this…”

“Thank you. But the reason we say this, if this work is what qualifies him, then we ought to know what he did in this work. Now, Professor Bender, Mr. Estrada's supervisor, is reported to have stated that Mr. Estrada was so ``ideologically driven that he couldn't be trusted to state the law in a fair, neutral way.'' He stated that he ``could not rely on [Mr. Estrada's] written work to be a neutral statement of the law.'' He also indicated that he viewed Mr. Estrada as ``smart and charming, but he is a right-wing ideologue'' and one who ``lacks judgment.'' Now, this is somebody who has actually seen his work. Unlike those of us who are not allowed to see it, he has seen it. Veteran Supreme Court lawyer Carter G. Phillips has also noted that Mr. Estrada, while ``extremely self-confident'' is a ``more strident personality'' than the other current nominee for this court, John Roberts. In fact, when Professor Bender ventured these honest opinions, he suffered partisan attacks by Republicans. Similar to what happened to those of us on the Democratic side on the Judiciary Committee, who had our religion attacked by Republican officeholders because we dared to vote against one of President Bush's nominees, Professor Bender was attacked because he dared to question one of President Bush's nominees. He was maligned for serving as the general counsel to a commission appointed by President Nixon. He was maligned for legal positions taken by the Clinton administration.”