Jimmie Reyna: A Man for All Seasons for the Supreme Court

judge-jimmie-reyna

Judge Jimmie Reyna

Robert Bolt’s award winning play and movie A Man for All Seasons (Best Picture 1966) spoke to a man named Thomas More who stood tall in any season, unswayed by political winds, a lawyer’s lawyer, devoted to justice. Perhaps only a Thomas More could win confirmation to the United States Supreme Court in today’s politically charged environment.

But we have such a man in our midst — Judge Jimmie V. Reyna, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. And it is merely a convenient aside that Judge Reyna comes from a demographic that neither party could reasonably have the will or political capital to alienate in a pitched opposition battle.

“It is my intention to nominate somebody who has impeccable credentials, somebody who should be a consensus candidate, is deserving to be on the Supreme Court,” said President Obama during a recent interview with CNN en Español anchor Juan Carlos Lopez. Judge Reyna is just such a person.

Over the weekend it has been reported that according to unnamed sources President Obama has narrowed his choice to one of three federal appeals court judges: Sri Srinivasan and Merrick Garland, both of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit, and Paul Watford, from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California. While it is certainly possible that the President has narrowed his consideration to these three candidates, history teaches us that strange twists and turns can and do occur in the Supreme Court nominating process.

With four years of experience on the Federal Circuit, confirmed to that court unanimously with a 86-0 vote and vocal bipartisan support, Judge Reyna would be the first Mexican-American to become a Supreme Court Justice, he would be the first international trade lawyer to become a Supreme Court Justice, and he would bring 30 years of broad legal experience and IP training to the High Court. The American Bar Association has ranked him as unanimously well-qualified, its highest ranking.

Judge Reyna is a faith-driven moderate whose story of excellence and overcoming obstacles both inspires and informs his experience as a sitting circuit court judge. His 180 written opinions evidence an unparalleled work ethic, and provide a clear insight into his judicial attributes: detailed attention to facts, cogent thinking, clear writing, and admittedly a singular ideology: devotion to justice. As we deserve and should expect from a Supreme Court justice, he is beholden to no group, political bent, or predetermined outcome. Further, as Gene Quinn observed when he suggested Judge Raymond Chen be nominated to the Supreme Court, given the Federal Circuit’s defined jurisdiction there will be no lurking judicial opinions that in any way relate to religious freedom, the Second Amendment, the Environmental Protection Agency or any hot button issue that could derail a Reyna nomination.

We realize this is a political season, and both political parties have politicized this appointment for their own reasons and objectives. Judge Reyna, however, stands apart from the political winds of change and stands unequivocally as representation of what could be possible if this appointment were based on strength of character and ability to seek and achieve justice.Only a Cromwell could oppose such a man.

 

Share

Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on IPWatchdog.com do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author as of the time of publication and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of IPWatchdog.com.

Join the Discussion

3 comments so far.

  • [Avatar for Titus Corleone]
    Titus Corleone
    March 17, 2016 11:33 am

    Unfortunately, it appears that Justice Reyna didn’t make the grade for the Supremes. It appears that he is trying to slip under the wire another closet judicial activist, and the news wires are beginning another campaign on behalf of their benefactor, the DNC, to apply pressure on the Republican party leadership to cave in, and allow another patently liberal justice onto the bench. However, millions of Americans of good conscience are reminding the GOP leadership of, “The Biden Rule” in which the current Vice President declared that in an election year, “No Republican nominee will be brought forward, so the people can hold their own referendum on who will choose candidates.” Well, guess what Mr. Vice President? It is an election year, and your declaration makes so much sense that we will insist of the GOP leadership they not consider any nominations until after the election – so the people may decide… Your words Mr. Vice President…

  • [Avatar for Night Writer]
    Night Writer
    March 15, 2016 01:37 pm

    >>unparalleled work ethic, and provide a clear insight into his judicial attributes: detailed attention to facts, cogent thinking, clear writing, and admittedly a singular ideology: devotion to justice

    I wouldn’t agree with this. J. Reyna is fairly anti-patent and ignorant of science. Maybe he would be good on the SCOTUS, but he is a terrible Fed. Cir. judge. Plus, he likely was selected, vetted, and approved by Google as has all the judges since O’Malley. He is one of the reasons to disband the Fed. Cir.

  • [Avatar for Paul Cole]
    Paul Cole
    March 15, 2016 10:50 am

    In the panel majority opinion in Ariosa v Sequenom, Judge Reyna:

    (1) held that the claimed invention begins and ends with a natural phenomenon and thus is directed to matter that is naturally occurring. To anyone with an interest in logical argument this must be a prodigious non-sequitur. In the words Shere Kahn spoke to Kaa the snake in the film of The Jungle Book: “How about the middle???” And if we apply the same logic to the manufacture of rayon fibres, the starting material is cellulose which is naturally occurring, the end material is still cellulose which is a naturally occurring material, so the spinning of the fibres cannot be a patent-eligible process can it?

    (2) held that the amplified cffDNA is a material which is naturally occurring, whereas it is the result of purposive enzymatic synthesis, the holding being in quantifiable error on the face of the opinion by a factor of 1000 to 1000000.

    (3) held that the method of detecting paternally inherited cffDNA is not new and useful. The hundreds of thousands of expectant mothers who benefit from non-invasive testing at an early stage in pregnancy, and the doctors and nurses who treat them, would almost unanimously beg to differ. Even considered in context in the opinion, the expression of such a holding creates significant doubt about the fact-finding ability, legal analysis and common sense of the individual making the statement.

    Res ipsa loquitur, sadly and with some embarrasment.