Glover withdraws nomination
State Supreme Court nominee faced difficult road amid questions about ’17 letter supporting Barrett
Federal prosecutor Sandra Glover asked Gov. Ned Lamont to withdraw her nomination to the state Supreme Court on Friday as it became apparent her confirmation by the legislature was doomed.
Lamont’s efforts to build support for the nomination failed to persuade lawmakers concerned by a letter Glover and dozens of others signed in 2017 in support of then-law professor Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the federal circuit court. Three years later, Coney Barrett was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court and joined the majority in its Dobbs’ decision holding that there is no federal, constitutional right to abortion.
At her confirmation hearing Monday, Glover told the legislative Judiciary Committee that she believes the Supreme Court’s abortion decision was “egregious” and she regrets signing the letter. Glover, now appellate chief at the U.S. Attorney’s office, was a law clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’connor and she signed the letter calling Coney Barrett “a woman of remarkable intellect and character” with 34 other former clerks.
In spite of repeated apologies, committee members pressed Glover on both Dobbs and the recommendation during an unusually long, seven-hour hearing. She was confronted on both issues by a group of mostly women legislators before the hearing, and lawmakers continued to express misgivings afterward.
Legislators and others close to Lamont described him as angered by what he considered mistreatment of Glover by legislators, who focused on the letter while ignoring her professional and academic record.
“Attorney Sandra Slack Glover would have been an extraordinary justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court,” Lamont said, announcing Friday afternoon that she had withdrawn from consideration for a seat on the state Supreme Court. “I stand by that, and I stand by her as a lawyer of experience, character, and compassion, while respecting her decision today to withdraw from consideration.
“Her career in public service and her dedication to the rule of law speak for themselves. She did a terrific job during her sevenhour public hearing and had substantive and positive meetings with legislative leaders from both parties. From beginning to end, she showed her talent, demonstrated her keen legal mind, and let people know she shares Connecticut’s values.
“In the coming months, I will consider other accomplished candidates who, like Sandy, share my values and are dedicated to the principles of justice, equality, and fairness under the law,” he said.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Steve Stafstrom, a Bridgeport Democrat, said Friday that Glover’s confirmation had been unlikely.
“Attorney Sandra Slack Glover faced a thorough vetting from the Judiciary Committee and many members felt there were unanswered questions that put her confirmation in jeopardy,” Stafstrom said. “While Attorney Glover is an experienced prosecutor and talented attorney, I respect her decision to withdraw her name from consideration to become a justice of our highest court. As one of the leaders of the Judiciary Committee I have had a strong working relationship with the governor and his staff and I look forward to continuing our work together confirming future nominations.”
There was support for Glover outside the legislature, where she is viewed as a talented lawyer and a political moderate. Doubts on her confirmation turned on questions about reproductive rights — even though reversal of a nearly half-century-old Roe decision on abortion seemed unlikely in 2017 and in spite of Glover’s emphatic endorsement of abortion rights at her marathon confirmation hearing Monday.
“I support a woman’s right to choose,” she told the judiciary committee during her opening statement. “Full stop. Speaking as an attorney, Dobbs was wrong and egregiously so. Speaking as a woman it was horrifying. All of us should have a constitutional right to control our reproductive freedom and our own bodies. My belief in this firm and unwavering.”
Several committee members expressed doubts about Glover, saying her professional experience to this point left them with nothing to gauge how she would rule in the future on questions involving subjects such as gun control and affirmative action. Those lawmakers said the U.S. Supreme Court had abdicated on Dobbs by putting abortion under state jurisdiction, increasing the importance of the state Supreme Court as a defender of personal liberty.
A day after the confirmation hearing, Lamont said he thought Glover showed she is capable of such a defense.
“I thought she was great,” Lamont said. “I thought she showed she has the qualifications to be a really strong Supreme Court justice … starting with being pro-choice and celebrating diversity and all the reasons you want the Supreme Court to protect our freedoms. But let’s face it. She’s not from the usual suspects. She comes from a little bit of a different background. That’s one of the things I liked about Sandy. … People want to get to know her better, and that’s what we’re doing.”
Had Glover been confirmed, she would have been at least the fourth state Supreme Court justice without prior judicial experience. Those who preceded her are Ellen Peters, a law professor; Richard Palmer a former federal prosecutor, Andrew Mcdonald, a lawyer and state senator; and Gregory T. D’auria, an assistant state attorney general.
The letter that appears to have undone Glover’s appointment was an effort by members of a prestigious club, law clerks to U.S. Supreme Court Justices during the court’s 1998 term, to support one of their own. While Glover clerked for the nation’s first-ever woman Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’connor, Barrett had clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia. Glover joined all the other clerks who worked during that term in signing the letter.
“I thought the Supreme Court was constrained,” Glover said. “But I was wrong. Looking back I now know I shouldn’t have signed it.”
Glover joined the U.S. Attorney’s office as an assistant prosecutor in 2004 and since 2010 has been the office’s Chief of Appeals, supervising all appeals arising out of the civil and criminal divisions. In 2012, she was appointed to the Appellate Chief ’s Working Group of the U.S. Attorney General’s Advisory Committee, and she served as chair of that Working Group, and as a member of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee, from 2014- 2017.
Prior to joining a private law practice and later the U.S. Attorney’s office, Glover was selected as a law clerk for Chief Judge Richard A. Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago and later for O’connor.
Glover obtained a bachelor’s degree with high distinction in foreign affairs from the University of Virginia and an M.A. in political science from Duke University. She graduated with highest honors from the University of Chicago Law School, where she served as Articles Editor for the University of Chicago Law Review.