Jonathan Oberman, a professor who trains public defenders at Cardozo Law School, also scoffs at Vance’s reasoning. “There are conflicting stories from a witness?” he says. “Okay — then just apply the same standard to poor and low-income people and let them derive the same benefit.”
Some Liberals Disappointed With Merrick Garland Pick
By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter
March 16, 2016 CNN - Washington (CNN) - Supreme Court vacancies don't come along that often, so when they do, interest groups of all stripes lobby the White House for their favorite candidate in displays that often go public in ugly ways.
This time, things were different. Since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia last month, many key liberal interest groups decided to remain silent and work toward the larger goal of making sure that Obama's candidate -- any candidate -- got a hearing. There were countless meetings at the White House and conference calls. There was also unprecedented discipline to stay on message and refrain from pushing certain constituencies. Last week the the National Council of of Asian Pacific Americans summed up the game plan in one post: "The President's Supreme Court nominee -- whoever it is -- deserves fair and prompt consideration."
As such when Garland's name emerged, the NAACP LDF was quick to issue a statement congratulating him. The American Constitution Society's Caroline Fredrickson said he was "impeccably qualified to serve."
But there are definitely liberals disappointed with Obama's pick of Merrick Garland.
It's not that they don't like him: Across the board from the early days he was on the top of almost every progressive's wish list. But it's that progressives were hoping for something different. The Supreme Court already has several Harvard Law graduates and Jewish justices, they note.