Kline & Specter: Personal Injury Litigation

(continued)
But the vast majority of judges who earned Specter's imprimatur were the products of the merit selection process and the political processes at the county level, culminating in the final review by Specter and his fellow senators over the years — first Heinz, then Harris Wofford, then 12 years with Rick Santorum and, most recently, Robert P. Casey Jr.

And the legacy may not yet be complete. As one lawyer put it: "Don't go writing Arlen Specter's political obituary just yet — there may be a few more judges named to the bench before he's finished."

Attorney Thomas R. Kline of Kline & Specter, who has served on the merit selection panel since 1989 and chaired it since 1998, said Specter has been "the moving and driving force" in the selection of federal judges in Pennsylvania for three decades.

Today's Eastern District bench is "centered, grounded, intellectually strong and able," Kline said, "and all with the imprimatur of Senator Specter."

Kline said the public generally noticed only Specter's role in nominations to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that the deeper impact came from Specter's work in the "quietly evolving" process of selecting judges for the district and circuit courts.

The screening committee played a critical role, Kline said, but Specter was "proactive" at every stage, meeting with every nominee and shepherding them through the nomination and confirmation process.

Kline said Specter insisted that judges not only have significant legal experience and intellectual capacity, but also demonstrate a commitment to fairness and equal justice. He also insisted that the bench constantly reflect geographic diversity, with judges drawn from all nine of the counties that make up the Eastern District.

U.S. District Judge Michael M. Baylson was selected by Specter twice — first to serve as U.S. attorney, and later to serve on the Eastern District bench.

Baylson said Specter's years as a lawyer and a prosecutor made him "intimately familiar with the judicial process — both civil and criminal — perhaps more than any other senator."

Specter was always interested in finding "bright" judges, Baylson said, but also wanted to ensure that any nominee he supported would be hard-working and efficient.

And when both of Pennsylvania's senators were Republicans and a Democrat was in the White House, Baylson said, Specter was able to strike a lasting deal that called for a bipartisan approach to selecting judges.

Behind the scenes, Baylson said, Specter was and is still involved in pressing for legislation that directly affects judges and lawyers and the judicial process, including a recent bill that ensured full voting privileges for senior judges.

Most recently, Specter introduced the "Notice Pleading Restoration Act of 2009," a bill that would change the standard for the dismissal of a federal complaint back to the approach set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1957 case of Conley v. Gibson , effectively overturning the Supreme Court's 2007 ruling in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly and the 2009 ruling in Ashcroft v. Iqbal.

Baylson also lauded Specter for the intense interest he always took in choosing U.S. attorneys who were committed to pursuing corruption cases, complex frauds and organized crime.

Lynn Marks, the executive director of Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, said she rates Specter highly for creating merit selection panels to screen all federal judges in Pennsylvania.

"It's critical to have that sort of process," Marks said, "and it's important that they include non-lawyers."

Marks also said Specter "cared a lot about racial and gender diversity," and that she expects the federal bench to become even more diverse as more women and minority lawyers gain the sort of experience necessary to make them viable candidates. •