Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

Reagan Considering 2 for Appeals Court : Berkeley Anti-Abortion Activist, San Diego Lawyer May Be Chosen

September 15, 1985|RONALD J. OSTROW and GEORGE RAMOS | Times Staff Writers

A UC Berkeley law professor who is a prominent anti-abortion activist and a San Diego attorney are apparently being considered by President Reagan for appointment to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Government sources in Washington said Friday that John T. Noonan Jr. and San Diego attorney David R. Thompson were being reviewed by the FBI and the American Bar Assn. Such reviews occur before formal judicial nominations are made by the President.

In addition, the sources said, three others--Dickran N. Tevrizian, 45, a former Los Angeles Superior Court judge; J. Spencer Letts, 50, a Los Angeles attorney, and John S. Rhoades, 60, a lawyer in San Diego--are under review for federal judgeships.

Tevrizian and Letts are expected to be nominated to the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. Rhoades would be named to the U.S. District Court's Southern District in San Diego.

Thompson, 54, is the brother of U.S. District Judge Gordon Thompson Jr. in San Diego.

Except for Noonan, the sources said, the nominations are expected to attract little attention when the men come up for confirmation before the U.S. Senate.

Noonan, 58, a professor at the Boalt Hall School of Law, may draw opposition from feminist and other pro-choice groups because of his well-known opposition to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on abortion. In that decision, the court ruled that abortion is a constitutionally protected right.

He has served as a director of Americans United for Life and serves as editor-in-chief of the Human Rights Journal.

In pushing for reversal of the Supreme Court ruling, he has argued for legislation that would declare that life begins at conception. He has said that many judges have read their views into the Constitution in upholding the right to abortion. He wrote recently:

"If the justices are unrestricted in reading their private views into the Constitution, then . . . the work of constitutional interpretation becomes a 'picnic to which farmers bring the words and the judges the meaning.' "

Feminist and other pro-choice groups have complained that the Reagan Administration is using opposition to abortion as a litmus test for appointment to a federal judgeship. Although spokesmen for such groups could not be reached for comment, congressional sources said feminists and liberals, upset over the President's preference for nominees who oppose abortion, may fight the nomination.

Ronald J. Ostrow reported from Washington and George Ramos from Los Angeles.

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|