The Court has instead become increasingly damaged, especially with landmark decisions such as in Dukes v. Wal-Mart, which told women that Wal-Mart is above the law. We only have to look back to Bush v. Gore, Citizens United, and numerous other cases to see that our highest court in the land does not mete out “Equal Justice Under Law.”

If the Equal Justice Society and its allies are to accomplish our mission of reclaiming the 14th Amendment and its protections against discrimination, we must be able to argue our cases before impartial justices who do not reflexively rule against the interests of average Americans.

Let’s connect the dots:

“Wal-Mart Gets a Free Pass For Bias From the Supreme Court” — “The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Dukes v. Wal-Mart sex discrimination case [Monday], a frustrating ruling that doesn’t challenge the existence of bias, but that exempts the company from accountability” wrote Rinku Sen on Colorlines.com. “The case highlights the difficulty of addressing discrimination at a time when intentional bias is both illegal and socially unacceptable, and yet obvious gender and racial gaps remain.”

Our friends at the Impact Fund and Equal Rights Advocates are continuing the fight. But like the Citizens United decision, the Dukes decision demonstrates that the Supreme Court will favor corporations over people and business interests over civil rights.

Eva Paterson ties together the problems with the courts. — EJS President Eva Paterson joined Nan Aron (Alliance for Justice), U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Dahlia Lithwick (Slate) and Carl Pope (Sierra Club) on a panel organized by Alliance for Justice at last week’s Netroots Nation to address the growing influence of corporations within the American judicial system, particularly in the Supreme Court. Watch the video.

And on top of the high court’s pattern of decisions, we see growing concern over ethics.

“Clarence Thomas participated in a secret political fundraising event put on by the Koch brothers to fund Tea Party infrastructure groups.” — A June 19 exposé in The New York Times detailed Justice Clarence Thomas’s ties to a conservative donor, his lack of disclosure in receiving gifts, and donations given to the Justice’s wife to fund a Tea Party-related group. From the NYT article: “The code of conduct is quite clear that judges are not supposed to be soliciting money for their pet projects or charities, period,” said Arn Pearson, a lawyer with Common Cause. “If any other federal judge was doing it, he could face disciplinary action.”

In April, Bob Egelko of the San Francisco Chronicle reported that Justice Antonin Scalia’s son was a partner in the firm representing Wal-Mart. Egelko describes the convoluted way in which Justice Scalia was able to escape an obligation to recuse himself from the case, but it demonstrates the need for more attention to the matter of judicial ethics.

It’s time that we work together to restore the Supreme Court to a level playing field with impartial referees so that our efforts to reclaim the 14th Amendment and the Constitutional protections against discrimination can someday be fairly heard.

The letter decries the persistent pattern of obstruction in the last Congress that “led to the lowest percentage of a president’s nominees being confirmed at this point in his presidency than any president in American history.” The signatories call for the members of the Senate to “work together in a bipartisan fashion to proceed with prompt confirmation votes.”

Senate leaders have promised a new spirit of compromise and cooperation during the recent debates over rules reform. Although the Senate has confirmed five nominees in this session, that number does not even keep pace with retirements from the federal bench announced in the last few months. President Obama has already renominated 42 nominees who were returned at the end of the 111th Congress, and the Senate has pledged to accelerate the pace of nominations in the current Congress.

The 76 groups signing the letter represent a wide range of constituencies and reflect growing concern throughout American society about the crisis in the courts and the threat to the viability of the judicial system posed by unfilled judicial vacancies.

A PDF copy of the letter and full list of signatories is available online.

In late June, EJS issued a brief summary endorsing Kagan and expressing our hopes and expectations for a new era on the Supreme Court, especially in the context of our work on the Intent Doctrine.

But other qualified nominees are still awaiting confirmation votes by the full Senate, even after being approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

As a recent editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle points out, the “federal trial and appeals courts are rife with vacancies. Just nine of Obama’s 22 appeals court nominations and 27 of his 63 trial court nominations have been confirmed by the Senate.”

Edward Chen and Goodwin Liu are just two of the many nominations still bottle-necked in the Senate.

Across the country, we need supporters to call Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and insist that he break the logjam preventing these and other qualified nominees from being voted on the by full Senate.

Join us for a light continental breakfast and to learn more about how your voice can be heard. This event is free, but space is limited. Registration is required here.

On December 17, 2009, President Obama nominated Sharon Browne, a senior attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation (“PLF”), to serve on the Legal Services Corporation (“LSC”) Board of Directors. Browne’s decades-long legal efforts to undo our nation’s progress in preserving social justice and equality are at odds with the mission of the Legal Services Corporation.

Browne has long advocated for the narrow application of civil rights laws geared toward creating a more just and equitable society. She made her name through her work on California’s Proposition 209, a ballot initiative that, upon its approval in 1996, prohibited the state from considering past discrimination “of any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”

Browne has also alleged that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, one of our nation’s most cherished civil rights laws protecting minorities against disenfranchisement, is illegal. Moreover, Browne has demonstrated an ingrained hostility to immigrants’ rights, championing California’s Proposition 227, which banned bilingual education in public schools, and Proposition 187, which prohibited undocumented immigrants from accessing California’s social services, health care, and public education systems.

As of February 2nd, President Obama has nominated 39 judges and had only 15 of them confirmed. At a similar point in his presidency, President Bush had nominated 89 judges and had 30 of them confirmed. President Bush doubled President Obama’s nomination and confirmation rate despite facing a Democratic-controlled Senate for most of the time period. This disparity is stark and must be quickly addressed.

The Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area (AABA) this morning issued a statement applauding President Barack Obama’s historic nomination and expressed its appreciation to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who forwarded the nomination to the White House.

Chen would be the first Asian American district judge on the bench in the 150-year history of that district. He was also the first Asian American magistrate judge when he was appointed to that position on April 23, 2001.

Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, federal judges require confirmation by the U.S. Senate and serve with lifetime tenure. Magistrate Judges have limited terms and serve as judicial officers of the district courts and exercise the jurisdiction delegated to them by law and assigned by federal district judges.

“I’ve known and worked with Judge Chen for more than 37 years and seen him become a great attorney and an outstanding jurist,” said attorney Dale Minami of Minami Tamaki LLP, who worked with Chen on the successful case to overturn the wartime conviction of Fred Korematsu for defying President Roosevelt’s internment order.

Garner Weng, President of the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area (AABA) noted that while there were a number of excellent Asian American candidates, “Judge Chen earned this nomination for his record of public service and his experience as a federal magistrate. We are extremely proud of his nomination and of his participation in AABA over the years.”

“Judge Chen will be a tremendous addition to the bench and has a wide range of support from diverse groups, including the public interest, law enforcement, legal, and minority communities,” said Edwin Prather, President of the Asian Pacific Bar of California and a former clerk for Chen. Prather also said that Chen received the 2007 Barristers Choice Award, an honor voted on by the membership of BASF’s Barristers Club and awarded to a jurist who has made extraordinary efforts to educate and encourage lawyers new to the courtroom.

Russell Roeca, President of the Bar Association of San Francisco, echoed Prather’s comments and praised Senator Feinstein for the nomination. “The Bar Association of San Francisco has long valued and advocated for a diverse judiciary and noted the complete lack of Latino and Asian American judges on the district court. In recommending Judge Chen to the President, Senator Feinstein has initiated a historical appointment.” Roeca also said that Chen received an “Exceptionally Well Qualified” rating from BASF’s Judiciary Committee.

“Judge Chen enjoys a solid reputation as an intelligent, reasonable, even-handed and diligent judge,” said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera. Chen “is a balanced and impartial judge whose temperament is well suited to the bench.”

“Judge Chen combines compassion and fairness with toughness and intellect in tacking difficult issues,” said attorney Ismail J. Ramsey, who has appeared numerous times before Chen. “He has always brought a practical approach to the issues, while ensuring that the rights of all those appearing before him were honored and making certain that the community was protected.”

“Judge Chen has earned a reputation as an evenhanded jurist who is constantly mindful of the role that judges fulfill in society as keepers of the rule of law and the public trust in our system of justice,” said David Wong, president of the San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association.

Chen graduated from the UC Berkeley School of Law where he earned membership in the Order of the Coif, the highest honor society at the school, and served on the California Law Review. He clerked for U.S. District Judge Charles B. Renfrew and U.S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge James R. Browning.

After his clerkships, Chen practiced as a litigation associate with the law firm of Coblentz, Cahen, McCabe & Breyer (now Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass). While with the Coblentz firm and then as a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, Chen joined the legal team representing Fred Korematsu.