Who Is Maureen E. Mahoney?
Maureen E. Mahoney is one of few names (along with Larry Thompson and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales) often bandied about when discussing replacements for outgoing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who is not a sitting jurist.#160; While Mahoney has yet to don a judicial robe, her credentials parallel those of the current Chief Justice to such a degree that Mahoney has been dubbed "the female John Roberts." Which legal historian David Garrow warns may work against her if the Bush administration does want someone with a similar pedigree to the new chief justice.
Mahoney graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Indiana University in 1974 and earned her J.D. from the University of Chicago in 1978.#160; After graduation, Mahoney clerked for Judge Robert Sprecher of the Seventh Circuit and (like Chief Justice Roberts) then Associate Justice William Rehnquist.
Mahoney has spent the bulk of her career in the private sector.#160; She worked at Latham & Watkins until 1991 when she was tapped by President George H.W. Bush to serve as a Deputy under Solicitor General Ken Starr.#160; After the Senate failed to take up her nomination to sit on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Mahoney returned to Latham where today she heads the firm's appellate and constitutional practice.
Regarded as a brilliant litigator, Mahoney has amassed an impressive record of Supreme Court victories.#160; Most recently, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States she convinced the Court to overturn convictions for obstruction of justice linked to the accounting firm's actions in the Enron fiasco.#160; Mahoney's most publicized victory aligns her closely to the Justice she could replace.#160; In Grutter v. Bollinger, Mahoney successfully defended the use of affirmative action admissions by the University of Michigan Law School.#160; Some social conservatives raise concerns about Mahoney's role in the case and her subsequent statements in which Mahoney notes that she "…was very comfortable with Michigan's position."
Mahoney testified during the Roberts confirmation hearings on behalf of the new Chief Justice. During her testimony, she argued that Roberts understood that the proper "the role of a judge is to serve, not to rule." While defending Roberts, she may have also laid the groundwork defending her work as a Deputy Solicitor General. "Please do not presume that the views that are expressed in briefs on behalf of the United States ... necessarily reflect the views he will adopt." She added, "Our job was to defend the policies of the administration within the bounds of law, within the realm of good logic, good reasoning.
Cases Mahoney Has Agrued Before the Supreme Court:
Arthur Andersen LLP v. U.S.
125 S.Ct. 2129
Grutter v. Bollinger
539 U.S. 306
N.L.R.B. v. Health Care & Retirement Corp. of America
511 U.S. 571, 114 S.Ct. 1778
U.S.,1994.
Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc.
509 U.S. 155
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Easterwood
507 U.S. 658
Reno v. Flores
507 U.S. 292
Building and Const. Trades Council of Metropolitan Dist. v. Associated Builders andBuilding and Const. Trades Council of Metropolitan Dist. v. Associated Builders and Contractors of Massachusetts/Rhode Island, Inc.
507 U.S. 218
Wright v. West
505 U.S. 277
McCarthy v. Madigan
503 U.S. 140 (Mahoney's only loss before the court)
I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias
502 U.S. 478
I.N.S. v. Doherty
502 U.S. 314
Mackey v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc.
486 U.S. 825