http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=92a5fc77-cf2b-4fbf-ac39-2ef3b89812fa
Maura Dolan reports for the LA Times:
Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the liberal face of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, died Thursday afternoon, a court spokesman said. He was 87.
The spokesman said Reinhardt died of a heart attack during a visit to a dermatologist in Los Angeles.
“All of us here at the 9th Circuit are shocked and deeply saddened by Judge Reinhardt’s death,” 9th Circuit Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas said. “We have lost a wonderful colleague and friend.”
Thomas called Reinhardt “deeply principled, fiercely passionate about the law and fearless in his decisions.”
“He will be remembered as one of the giants of the federal bench. He had a great life that ended much too soon,” Thomas said.
Reinhardt, an appointee of former President Carter, was dubbed the “liberal lion” of the federal circuit courts.
His rulings in favor of criminal defendants, minorities and immigrants were often overturned by the more conservative U.S. Supreme Court.
Many lawyers have joked that Reinhardt’s name on a ruling was probably enough to get the attention of the conservatives on the Supreme Court. In 1996, after Reinhardt was reversed several times by the Supreme Court, The Times asked him if he was upset.
“Not in the slightest!” he boomed. “If they want to take away rights, that’s their privilege. But I’m not going to help them do it.”
No matter how many reversals he endured, Reinhardt used the bench to try to help the underdog. Just a few months ago, he called The Times to read a reporter a letter from a woman who had just been released from prison and who wanted to thank him for ruling in her favor.
“He was a giant not just on the 9th Circuit but within the law,” UC Berkeley law school Dean Erwin Chemerinsky said. “He also was a judge with a particular vision of the law, based on enforcing the Constitution to protect people.”
Reinhardt joined another judge in ruling that the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance were unconstitutional, a decision that was later overturned.
He wrote a ruling that said laws prohibiting physician-assisted suicide were unconstitutional and another that overturned California’s previous ban on same-sex marriage.
Reinhardt also lamented Supreme Court rulings that limited judges’ ability to overturn convictions and sentences on habeas corpus and complained about the flaws in death penalty cases.
He was among the federal judges who decided that overcrowding in California’s prison system was unconstitutional.
“His view was to decide cases as he believed the law required, not to predict what the Supreme Court would do,” Chemerinsky said. “He was unapologetic about that.”
Conservatives often railed against Reinhardt, calling him lawless. They accused him of never voting to uphold a death sentence. Reinhardt, asked about that, said he was not sure.
He was particularly close to former 9th Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, considered a conservative with libertarian views. They were dubbed the “odd couple.”
When Kozinski retired under pressure in December in response to sexual harassment allegations, Reinhardt bemoaned the departure. He said he kept a photograph of Kozinski planting a kiss on his cheek in his chambers.
********************************************
Read Dolan’s complete obit on Judge Reinhardt at the above link.
************************************************
My friend and former BIA colleague Judge Lory Diana Rosenberg added this heartfelt tribute:
I am heartbroken to learn of Judge Reinhardt’s dying. Just knowing he was alive and participating in our courts gave me deep hope that justice would prevail, at least in some quarters. I am so fortunate to have known him and to have spent a tiny bit of time with him and his wife at an international meeting years ago. He is a giant among judges. I will miss him.
********************************************
Here’s an excerpt from my favorite Judge Reinhardt concurring opinion in Magna-Ortiz v. Sessions:
The government’s insistence on expelling a good man from the country in which he has lived for the past 28 years deprives his children of their right to be with their father, his wife of her right to be with her husband, and our country of a productive and responsible member of our community. Magana Ortiz, who first entered the United States at 15, is now 43 years old, and during his almost three decades here has raised a family and built a successful life. All of his children, ages 12, 14, and 20, were born in this country and are American citizens, as is his wife. His eldest daughter currently attends the University of Hawaii, and he is paying for her education.
. . .
President Trump has claimed that his immigration policies would target the “bad hombres.” The government’s decision to remove Magana Ortiz shows that even the “good hombres” are not safe.3 Magana Ortiz is by all accounts a pillar of his community and a devoted father and husband. It is difficult to see how the government’s decision to expel him is consistent with the President’s promise of an immigration system with “a lot of heart.” I find no such compassion in the government’s choice to deport Magana Ortiz.
We are unable to prevent Magana Ortiz’s removal, yet it is contrary to the values of this nation and its legal system. Indeed, the government’s decision to remove Magana Ortiz diminishes not only our country but our courts, which are supposedly dedicated to the pursuit of justice. Magana Ortiz and his family are in truth not the only victims. Among the others are judges who, forced to participate in such inhumane acts, suffer a loss of dignity and humanity as well. I concur as a judge, but as a citizen I do not.
2 The family’s right to occupy their home will terminate upon Magana Ortiz’s removal.
3 On January 25, 2017, the President signed a series of executive orders dismantling the system of priorities that had previously guided Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol in determining whom to deport. The orders also gave far greater authority to individual agents and officers, who are now removing non-citizens simply because they are here illegally, regardless of whether they have committed any offense. In light of the breadth of these orders and the lack of any apparent limit on agents’ discretion, the undocumented must now choose between going to work, school, hospitals, and even court, and the risk of being seized. See James Queally, ICE Agents Make Arrests at Courthouses, L.A. Times, March 16, 2017.
************************************************
I must say that I had the same feelings as Judge Reinhardt on a number of occasions in my judicial career, although I never expressed them as eloquently as he did.
The wastefulness and futility of spending Government time, money, and authority removing fine people who were making remarkable contributions to our country, our economy, and our society certainly was apparent at the Immigration Court level. That this Administration has cynically chosen to aggravate this inhumane and quite frankly stupid situation rather than to attempt to fix it is most disheartening as is the fact that by placing them and retaining them in power we all become complicit in their bias and injustice! Harm to the most vulnerable among us is harm to all!
You can read the 9th Circuit’s complete decision in Magana Ortiz v. Sessions including Judge Reinhardt’s concurrence at this link:
Magana-Ortiz-9thReinhardt17-16014
PWS
03-30-18