Bill Clinton - Memorandum on Process for Filling Supreme Court Vacancy lyrics

MEMORANDUM FOR BRUCE LINDSEY, BERNIE NUSSBAUM, VINCE FOSTER FROM: RON KLAIN SUBJECT: SUPREME COURT VACANCY: PROCESS The purpose of this memorandum is to set forth a process to be used in implementing a tentative Presidential decision to select [redacted (b)(6)] for the White vacancy. OVERALL STRATEGY ISSUE The basic question is to what extent do we conduct a "search" if the President has made up his mind; i.e., do we cast a broad net for prospective candidates if the outcome is basically preordained? My view is that, if the President tentatively selects [redacted (b)(6)] we should do less, and not more, outreach-type activities. There is no reason to needlessly prolong the process, where one of the principal advantages to selecting [redacted (b)(6)] is that his nomination brings rapid closure to the process. Consequently, the plan I outline below reflects what I believe is the minimum we can undertake, prudently, prior to our announcement of an intention to nominate [redacted (b)(6)]. SPECIFIC MEASURES THAT SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN There are four specific measures that should be undertaken before a decision is announced. 1. Senate Consultation Senate leaders, particularly Chairman Biden, have previously made strong statements about their desire to be consulted on Supreme Court nominations; if we fail to do so, we will engender considerable ill-will towards our nominee. While I am awaiting Howard's views on this question, I personally believe that we should share a list of 15-20 names with key Democratic Senators (Mitchell, Biden, and Ford), for their reaction and response. They would prefer for this consultation to be public; I am less certain about that. The list to be used for consultation should contain some named that will be even less desirable to conservatives than [redacted (b)(6)]. It should also reflect geographic, gender, racial, and professional diversity. We should a**ume that the list, in its entirety, will be leaked to the press. A proposed list to be used in consultations is attached. With respect to the Republican Senators themselves (Dole and Hatch), I would have the President call them and seek out their comments and reaction, without offering them a specific list for review. While even these consultations may draw criticism from the left -- and be called unnecessary, since Democrats control the Senate -- it will make confirmation an easier task. I would also urge the President to call the Democratic women on the Judiciary Committee (Feinstein and Moseley-Braun) to get their reaction to [redacted (b)(6)]. We will need them to back us up if we do not choose a woman for this vacancy. 2. Legal Profession Consultations Attorney General Reno has raised the question of whether we should launch a visible effort to consult with leaders of the legal profession -- bar leaders, law school deans, state Attorneys General -- about potential candidates. She has urged this, both as a substantive matter -- it may yield a winning candidate -- and as a political matter -- it brings benefits in any event. I am skeptical of highly public outreach efforts if the choice is going to be [redacted (b)(6)]. However, the President may want to make a few calls, to selected bar leaders, selected deans, and selected AGs, to indicate a level of concern and interest in the choice. I have attached a proposed list of calls. 3. Vetting and the FBI Investigation Earlier, I raised the possibility of submitting multiple candidates to vetting. If we are centering the process on [redacted (b)(6)], that does not make sense. However, we need to decide whether we would vet [redacted (b)(6)] pre-announcement: (a) internally and/or (b) via an FBI background investigation (adding about 10 days to the process, and leaks). Our options are discussed below. a. The Internal Vet The internal vet would have two phases: investigations prior to [redacted (b)(6)] meeting with the President, and inquiries following the meeting. 1. Prior to the Presidential Meeting Prior to [redacted (b)(6)] meeting with the President, he should be interviewed, at the Department of Justice, by Attorney General Reno, Bernie Nussbaum, and Vince Foster. The three should engage in a long and specific inquiry concerning any potential confirmation problems. In advance of this meeting, we should ask [redacted (b)(6)] to complete: (a) The Personal Data Questionnaire, used by us and the ABA to evaluate judicial nominees; (b) The Medical Questionnaire, for internal purposes only; and (c) The Financial Questionnaire, also for internal purposes. These materials could be reviewed and serve as a basis for the questioning of [redacted (b)(6)] in the meeting with Reno, Nussbaum, and Foster. The goals is to insure that the staff is confident that [redacted (b)(6)] does not have disqualifying problems before he is sent in to meet with the President. 2. Subsequent to the Presidential Meeting Subsequent to the Presidential meeting, [redacted (b)(6)]'s forms and the supporting materials should be turned over to an experienced vetting team, for their full review and an*lysis. This group should report to Attorney General Reno and Bernie Nussbaum, who will make a final recommendation to the President about a decision on the nomination. b. Use of the FBI The final question is whether we want to do any FBI work on [redacted (b)(6)] prior to the announcement of his selection. While we might not want to await a complete FBI Background Investigation to announce his selection, we could ask [redacted (b)(6)] to complete papers necessary to perform an FBI file check. This would make us aware of any appearances of [redacted (b)(6)]'s name in FBI investigative files. In addition, in this way we could say that some FBI investigation of [redacted (b)(6)] was done before the announcement. Obviously, once a public announcement is made, a full-scale background check will be conducted. 4. American Bar Association Before we proceed with [redacted (b)(6)] we should ask the ABA for a 24-hour "read" on him: an informal process whereby they poll their Committee members and give us a "sense" of their likely evaluation of him. This would be confidential on both sides (we could not disclose that we had done this), and would not prevent the ABA from issuing a lower rating later.