Richard Posner

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Richard Posner
Image of Richard Posner

Nonpartisan

Prior offices
United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Education

Bachelor's

Yale University, 1959

Law

Harvard Law School, 1962

Personal
Birthplace
New York, N.Y.


Richard Allen Posner was a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit. He joined the court in 1981 after being nominated by President Ronald Reagan and served on the court until his retirement from judicial service on September 2, 2017.[1][2][3] In 2000, Posner was identified by scholar Fred R. Shapiro in the Journal of Legal Studies as the most-cited legal scholar of the 20th century.[4][5]

Early life and education

A native of New York, New York, Posner graduated from Yale University with his bachelor's degree in 1959 and later earned a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1962. Posner was valedictorian of his Harvard Law class.[1][4]

Professional career

  • 1993-2000: Chief judge

Judicial career

Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Nomination Tracker
Fedbadgesmall.png
Nominee Information
Name: Richard A. Posner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
Progress
Confirmed 28 days after nomination.
ApprovedANominated: October 27, 1981
DefeatedAABA Rating:
Questionnaire:
DefeatedAHearing:
QFRs: (Hover over QFRs to read more)
DefeatedAReported:  
ApprovedAConfirmed: November 24, 1981
ApprovedAVote: Unanimous consent


Posner was nominated by President Ronald Reagan on October 27, 1981, to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit vacated by Philip Tone. Posner was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on November 24, 1981, by unanimous consent and he received his commission on December 1, 1981. Posner served as the chief judge of the court from 1993 to 2000. He retired from judicial service on September 2, 2017.[1][2][3][6]

Noteworthy cases

Title VII discrimination case (2017)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (Kimberly Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, 15-1720)

Judge Richard Posner wrote a concurring opinion in the case of Hively v. Ivy Tech, which was argued before the full Seventh Circuit court on November 30, 2016, and decided by the court on April 4, 2017. In his concurrence, he advocated for interpreting the Civil Rights act under what he dubbed judicial interpretive updating, that is a manner of interpretation which "can mean giving a fresh meaning to a statement (which can be a statement found in a constitutional or statutory text)—a meaning that infuses the statement with vitality and significance today." Based on this interpretative view, Posner concluded that "the most tenable and straightforward ground for deciding in favor of Hively is that while in 1964 sex discrimination meant discrimination against men or women as such and not against subsets of men or women such as effeminate men or mannish women, the concept of sex discrimination has since broadened in light of the recognition, which barely existed in 1964, that there are significant numbers of both men and women who have a sexual orientation that sets them apart from the heterosexual members of their genetic sex (male or female), and that while they constitute a minority their sexual orientation is not evil and does not threaten our society. Title VII in terms forbids only sex discrimination, but we now understand discrimination against homosexual men and women to be a form of sex discrimination; and to paraphrase Holmes, 'We must consider what this country has become in deciding what that [statute] has reserved.'"[7]

Confirming district court rulings on same-sex marriages (2014)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (Baskin v. Bogan and Wolf v. Walker, 14-2386, 14-2388 and 14-2526)

Judge Richard Posner wrote the opinion for a Seventh Circuit panel that heard the cases of Baskin v. Bogan and Wolf v. Walker, which involved same-sex marriage in Indiana and Wisconsin. The other members of the panel were David Hamilton and Ann Williams. During oral arguments, both Wisconsin and Indiana attorney's argued that their respective states' ban on same-sex marriage was to dissuade "accidental births" that led to children being raised by a single parent or in the foster system. This argument was dismissed by the panel during oral arguments, as well as in Judge Posner's written opinion. Posner wrote:

“ Overlooked by this argument is that many of those abandoned children are adopted by homosexual couples, and those children would be better off both emotionally and economically if their adoptive parents were married.[8][9] ”

On the point of Indiana's defense, that the only purpose for marriage is for the betterment of children, Posner found that if this was the sole purpose for marriage, allowing heterosexual couples who cannot conceive would not be permissible in the state.[8]

Posner continued on in his dismantling of the defense arguments, dismissing Wisconsin's argument of tradition being a basis for their ban on same-sex marriage. This argument was found be flawed because interracial marriage was defended on the same principle and does not establish the legality of discrimination.[8]

The Seventh Circuit upheld the Wisconsin and Indiana rulings that struck down the ban on same-sex marriages. Indiana and Wisconsin appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.[10]

"Banana Lady" copyright infringement case dismissed (2014)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (Conrad v. AM Community Credit Union, et al, 13-2899)

On April 14, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit, composed of Judges Richard Posner, Michael Kanne and John Tinder, found that Catherine Conrad (also known as the "Banana Lady"), a pro se plaintiff, did not have a valid copyright infringement claim related to videos of her "singing telegram" performance posted on Facebook.[11]

In the underlying case, Conrad performed at a credit union trade association conference, but asked that audience members not take photos or videos of the performance, save for their own personal use. Audience members then posted photos and videos of her performance on their personal Facebook pages, which prompted Conrad to sue, alleging violations of her intellectual property rights. Judge Barbara Crabb of the Western District of Wisconsin dismissed Conrad's suit, finding that it had no legal merit.[11]

Conrad further appealed to the Seventh Circuit, where Posner, writing for the majority, affirmed Judge Crabb's dismissal of the lawsuit, noting that the "Banana Lady" had long abused the judicial system, having filed at least eight "frivolous lawsuits" in federal court since 2009, and at least nine in state court since 2011. Posner encouraged the Western District of Wisconsin to prevent Conrad from filing additional lawsuits until she paid her prior litigation debts of over $130,000 in defendants' fees and costs.[11]

Seventh Circuit upholds restraint on enforcement of abortion law (2013)

The Wisconsin Legislature passed a law requiring doctors who perform abortions in the state to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility. Opponents of the law, primarily Planned Parenthood, argued that such a requirement would effectively prevent women in certain portions of the state from obtaining an abortion because hospitals usually grant admitting privileges to a doctor who can refer a set number of patients to it. Modern abortions rarely face complications requiring hospital admittance; therefore, few abortion doctors would meet a hospital's quota of referrals.

Planned Parenthood sued to stop enforcement of this particular law and, in July 2013, U.S. District Judge William Conley issued a one-year restraining order preventing the state from taking action against a doctor who did not have admitting privileges. The state appealed to the Seventh Circuit, which upheld Judge Conley’s order on December 20, 2013.

Judge Richard Posner wrote for the three-judge panel. (JudgesDavid Hamilton and Daniel Manion were also part of the panel.) Judge Posner said that, had the law not been enjoined, two of the state’s four abortion clinics would have been shut down. Further, even “fully qualified” doctors were unable to comply with the law due to hospital restrictions and policies concerning to whom the hospitals grant admitting privileges.[12] Judge Posner said that the state was treating abortion differently from other invasive outpatient procedures and, under the equal protection clause, the law is a violation. The one-year restraining order was proper in this case.

Articles:

Hal Turner threatens fed. judges (2009-2010)
See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (United States, v. Harold Turner, 1:09-cr-00542)

Judge Richard Posner faced a death threat from a blogger in the state of New Jersey after the ruling in the National Rifle Association v. Chicago case. The death threat happened after Judge Posner participated in the gun rights case with fellow judges Frank Easterbrook and William Bauer.[13]

On June 2, 2009, the three judges unanimously upheld the ban on handguns in the city of Chicago.[14] The judges on the panel ruled that the Second Amendment does not preempt Chicago's handgun ban.[14] Hal Turner, the blogger from New Jersey, was not happy with the judges' decision and posted a headline on his blog saying, "these judges deserve to be killed" after the three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit issued its ruling.[13]

Hal Turner was subsequently charged with threatening a federal judge.[13] Under the Court Security Enhancement Act of 2007, Turner would have faced a long prison sentence if convicted because the 2007 law increased sentences for any person convicted of threatening a federal judge.[13] On December 8, 2009, Turner was acquitted after the jury deadlocked in reaching a verdict.[15]

Judge Posner testified on March 2, 2010, in the second trial of Hal Turner. Posner, along with fellow judges Easterbrook and Bauer, testified as witnesses for the prosecution. None of the three judges were called as witnesses during the first trial for Turner.[16]

In August 2010, Turner was convicted in his second trial, and sentenced to 33 months in prison. He appealed, claiming again that he had engaged in political speech protected by the First Amendment. The Second Circuit upheld the conviction, saying that while Turner had a constitutionally protected right to criticize courts, he had no such right, and it is against the law, to threaten the lives of judges with intent. Turner argued that his statements were "political hyperbole," but this argument was rejected.[17]

"Fast Eddie" case: Chicago Alderman Edward Vrdolyak guilty of fraud (2009-2010)
See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (United States, v. Edward R. Vrdolyak, 09-1891)

Judge Posner was the lead judge in a three-judge panel that heard oral arguments in the case of federal prosecutors who appealed a five-year probation sentence for former Chicago Alderman Eddie Vrdolyak.

During oral arguments, Judge Posner expressed serious issues over fellow federal judge Milton Shadur sentencing the alderman to five years of probation after Vrdolyakpleadedguilty to fraud charges.

Federal prosecutors asked the judges to allow Vrdolyak to be re-sentenced by another federal judge.[18]

On January 29, 2010, a panel led by Judge Posner voted 2-1 to order the re-sentencing of Edward Vrdolyak. In the written opinion, Posner said that Judge Shadur erred in judgment and gave Vrdolyak "a slap on the wrist" sentence. Attorneys for Vrdolyak planned to appeal the ruling en banc, meaning all the judges in the Seventh Circuit would to rule.[19]

Wisconsin law degrees and the WI bar (2009)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (Christopher L. Wiesmueller, v. John Kosobucki, et al., 07-c-2601)

In July 2009, Judge Posner re-authorized a class-action lawsuit over the diploma-privilege clause given to graduates of Wisconsin and Marquette Law. Judge Posner's decision to reauthorize the case raised questions about Wisconsin's practice of admitting new graduates from Marquette and Wisconsin Law to the bar without taking a bar exam. The clause stated that graduates of accredited law schools within states other than Wisconsin that want to practice law in the state have to pass the Wisconsin bar exam or have practiced law for five years in another state.[20]

The plaintiffs, graduates of Oklahoma City Law, argued Wisconsin's policy violated the commerce clause of the Constitution by discriminating against graduates of out-of-state law schools. The plaintiffs claimed that Wisconsin should extend diploma privilege to graduates of other law schools. The lawsuit named the Wisconsin Board of Bar Examiners and the Wisconsin Supreme Court as defendants.

The case was first filed in 2007 in the Western District of Wisconsin. Senior Judge John C. Shabaz dismissed the case. Judge Shabaz said "that diploma privilege does not discriminate because everyone who did not graduate from a Wisconsin law school has to take the bar." Judge Shabaz in his ruling mentioned state residents and non-residents alike.

Fellow judges Diane Wood and Ken Ripple also served with Judge Posner on the panel. The panel ordered the case to be re-heard by the Western District of Wisconsin.[20]

Views on marijuana decriminalization

In a September 2012 lecture at Elmhurst College, Posner called for the elimination of criminal laws against marijuana. In his comments, Posner said, "The notion of using the criminal law as the primary means of dealing with a problem of addiction, of misuse, of ingesting dangerous drugs—I don’t think that’s sensible at all.” Posner noted that drug laws are “responsible for a high percentage of our prisoners. And these punishments are often very, very severe. It’s all very expensive." In addition, Posner said that drug laws are “…a waste of a lot of high quality legal minds, and it’s also a waste of people’s lives who could be at least moderately productive without having to spend year after year in prison. That is a serious problem.”[4]

Scholarship

Posner has written over 40 books on a variety of topics. A number of law schools have classes devoted to the study of Posner's rulings.[4]

See also

External links


Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Federal Judicial Center, "Biographical directory of federal judges," accessed May 31, 2016
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Ballotpedia staff, "Telephone communication with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals' Clerk's Office," September 5, 2017
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 The Chicago Tribune, "Richard Posner announces sudden retirement from federal appeals court in Chicago," September 1, 2017
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Lawyers.com, "Respected Federal Judge Calls for Legalizing Marijuana," September 7, 2012
  5. ↑ Journal of Legal Studies, "The Most-Cited Legal Scholars, Volume 29, Issue 1," 2000
  6. ↑ United States Congress, PN 762 - Richard A. Posner - The Judiciary," accessed May 31, 2016
  7. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Kimberly Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, April 4, 2017
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, "Baskin v. Bogan," September 4, 2014
  9. ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  10. ↑ Think Progress, "Seventh Circuit Unanimously Rejects Indiana And Wisconsin’s Same-Sex Marriage Bans," September 4, 2014
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 Courthouse News Service, "7th Circuit Squishes Banana Lady's Suit," April 16, 2014
  12. ↑ Courthouse News, "Abortion Law Remains Enjoined in Wisconsin," December 24, 2013
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 Chicago Sun-Times, "Fresh fears for judges," July 13, 2009
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Chicago Daily Herald, "Court upholds Chicago handgun ban," June 2, 2009
  15. ↑ New York Law Journal, "Mistrial in Case of Blogger Accused of Threatening Judges," December 8, 2009
  16. ↑ New York Times, "3 U.S. Judges Testify in a Death Threat Case," March 2, 2010
  17. ↑ Reuters, "U.S. court upholds radio host's conviction for threats to judges," June 21, 2013
  18. ↑ Chicago Tribune, "Edward Vrdolyak: Appeals court examines former alderman's light sentence," December 11, 2009
  19. ↑ Chicago Sun-Times, "Appeals panel revokes Vrdolyak's get-out-of-jail-free card," January 30, 2010
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Journal Sentinel, "Lawsuit challenges policy that lets some grads skip bar exam," July 12, 2009
Political offices
Preceded by:
Philip Tone 		Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
1981-2017 		Succeeded by:
Michael Scudder



Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Richard_Posner&oldid=8498777"