David S. Tatel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| David S. Tatel | |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Incumbent | |
| Assumed office October 1994 |
|
| Appointed by | Bill Clinton |
|---|---|
| Preceded by | Ruth Bader Ginsburg |
|
|
|
| Born | March 16, 1942 |
| Nationality | United States |
| Alma mater | University of Michigan University of Chicago Law School |
David S. Tatel (born March 16, 1942) was appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by President Bill Clinton in October 1994. He filled the seat vacated by Ruth Bader Ginsburg's elevation to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Judge Tatel earned an undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan in 1963 and a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School in 1966. Following law school, he was an instructor at the University of Michigan Law School and then joined Sidley Austin in Chicago. Since then, he has served as founding director of the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Director of the National Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and Director of the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare during the Jimmy Carter Administration. Returning to private practice in 1979, he joined Hogan & Hartson, where he founded and headed the firm's education practice until his appointment to the D.C. Circuit. While on sabbatical from Hogan and Hartson, Judge Tatel spent a year as a lecturer at Stanford Law School.
Judge Tatel has served on many non-profit boards, including The Spencer Foundation, which he chaired from 1990 to 1997. He currently chairs the Board of The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. He is a member of the American Philosophical Society, the National Academy of Education, and the National Academy of Sciences' Committee of Science, Technology, and Law. He has given addresses at the Spencer Foundation’s fiftieth anniversary dinner, the 2003 Madison Lecture at the New York University School of Law, Macalester College’s 2004 commencement, and the portrait ceremonies of fellow judges Patricia Wald, Stephen F. Williams, and Louis Oberdorfer. Judge Tatel and his wife, Edith, have four children and six grandchildren.
[edit] Notable opinions
Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Mukasey, 2008 WL 2221034 (D.D.C. 2008): Rejecting a constitutional challenge to the Voting Rights Act's preclearance requirement, Judge Tatel’s 121-page opinion held that the rationality standard articulated in South Carolina v. Katzenbach and City of Rome v. United States—two Supreme Court decisions upholding prior versions of the Act—remains the appropriate standard of review despite the congruence and proportionality test announced in City of Boerne v. Flores. After a thorough review of the legislative record, which documented the continuing problem of racial discrimination in voting, the court concluded that the preclearance requirement satisfies both the rationality standard and the more demanding congruence and proportionality test. Because the case was heard by a three-judge district court, the Supreme Court would hear any appeal on a non-discretionary basis during the October 2008 term.
In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller, 397 F.3d 964 (D.C. Cir. 2005): While investigating the Valerie Plame affair, a grand jury issued subpoenas to journalists Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper regarding their communications with Scooter Libby. Refusing to testify before the grand jury, Miller spent ninety days in jail for civil contempt. The D.C. Circuit unanimously upheld the contempt decision. Judge Tatel concurred, suggesting that there is a federal common law, qualified journalist privilege, but that it was not met in this case because the grand jury’s need for the journalists’ testimony outweighed the burden of disclosure on newsgathering. Borrowing Tatel’s suggestion for a federal, qualified journalist privilege, the Free Flow of Information Act is now under consideration in Congress.
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 415 F.3d 50 (D.C. Cir. 2005): The D.C. Circuit held that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) properly had declined to exercise its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. Later vindicated by the Supreme Court, Judge Tatel’s dissent argued that the EPA had failed to comply with the mandate of the Clean Air Act when it had declined to issue regulations without giving a statutorily based justification for not making a finding of environmental endangerment.
Center for National Security Studies v. U.S. Department of Justice, 331 F.3d 918 (D.C. Cir. 2003): Denying a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking the names of post-9/11 detainees and their attorneys, the D.C. circuit, articulating what would become known as the “mosaic theory,” held that this information was within FOIA’s law enforcement exemption. Judge Tatel dissented, saying the “court’s uncritical deference to the government’s vague, poorly explained arguments for withholding [information] as well as its willingness to fill in the factual and logical gaps in the government’s case, eviscerates both FOIA itself and the principles of openness in government that FOIA embodies.” Moreover, Judge Tatel noted, there was “ample evidence of agency wrongdoing. The record includes [many public documents] reporting alleged governmental abuses such as holding detainees for long periods without allowing them to seek or communicate with counsel and without charging them.... History, moreover, is full of examples of situations in which just these sorts of allegations led to the discovery of serious government wrongdoing.” Litigation related to the post-9/11 detainment of hundreds of Arab and Muslim immigrants and citizens remains pending in many courts.
American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency, 175 F.3d 1027 (D.C. Cir. 1999): Invalidating national ambient air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter, the D.C. Circuit concluded that Congress unconstitutionally delegated its legislative powers to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Tatel dissented, rebutting the majority’s non-delegation theory and arguing that EPA acted within its statutory authority under the Clean Air Act. Agreeing with Judge Tatel, a unanimous Supreme Court, in an opinion written Justice Scalia, reversed the D.C. Circuit. On remand, Judge Tatel’s majority opinion held that the EPA’s regulations were neither arbitrary nor capricious.
[edit] References
- David S. Tatel at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges, a public domain publication of the Federal Judicial Center.
- White House press release announcing Tatel's nomination
