The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“MR. EDELMAN'S QUALIFICATIONS” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S1474 on Jan. 24, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
MR. EDELMAN'S QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I read George Will's column attacking Peter Edelman. It was a column written by someone who, obviously, has not had a chance to get acquainted with Peter Edelman. Knowing both George Will and Peter Edelman, my instinct is that if the two of them got acquainted, George Will would be one of his enthusiastic supporters, or at least a supporter.
John Douglas, who headed the Civil Division of the Justice Department under Robert Kennedy, is the son of our former colleague Senator Paul Douglas. Paul Douglas was one of the finest people who ever served in the U.S. Senate, and John is cut from the same cloth.
I believe my colleagues would be interested in his letter to the editor, which appeared in the Washington Post.
I join in the sentiment it expresses.
I've known Peter Edelman for a number of years, and I've always regarded him as a solid, substantial, well-balanced person, who would be a great judge.
I ask to insert the John Douglas letter into the Record at this point.
The letter follows:
Mr. Edelman's Qualifications
(By John W. Douglas)
I write in response to George Will's attack on Peter Edelman's qualifications to be a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals here, an attack centering on a law review article he wrote some years ago on the 14th Amendment [op-ed, Dec. 18].
I have known Mr. Edelman for more than 30 years and have the highest opinion of his character and competence. He worked as my special assistant in 1963 and 1964 when I was an assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department's Civil Division. He performed in outstanding fashion in a variety of matters, including litigation for which he was directly responsible, handling his work with skill, excellent judgment and high standards.
He has earned equally high marks for his subsequent work as an assistant to Sen. Robert Kennedy, a vice president of the University of Massachusetts and a law professor at Georgetown. This long record of distinguished and principled service commends him strongly for nomination to the federal judiciary.
Thus, it would be a shame if his critics' attacks on his article's treatment of theoretical constitutional issues were allowed to preclude his nomination. I am confident that at a confirmation hearing Mr. Edelman would be able to convince the committee that, if confirmed, he would faithfully follow the law, as is required of all federal judges, and that he fully understands that neither the due-process clause nor any other constitutional provision guarantees subsistence, or any level of subsistence, to its citizens; consequently, these are matters for the political branches, particularly the legislatures, to deal with and decide.
In any event, this particular question should not be decided in advance of a hearing and in a vacuum without giving due weight to Mr. Edelman's impressive record.
____________________
