Search

Search Constraints

Start Over You searched for: Collection Daniel J. Meador papers Remove constraint Collection: Daniel J. Meador papers Date range 1978 Remove constraint Date range: 1978

Search Results

Judicial Selection – OIAJ documents pertaining to merit selection of Federal Judges and U.S. Attorneys during the administration of President Carter; Daniel J. Meador, Assistant Attorney General, Address before the Virginia Bar Association Conference of Laymen and Lawyers: Selecting Federal Appellate Judges (Nov. 19, 1977); interview by Aaron Epstein of Griffin B. Bell, Attorney General, Philadelphia Inquirer (Sept. 26, 1977); Report of the American Judicature Society, Special Committee to Study Federal Judicial Selection (Jan. 1977); newspaper clippings; correspondence with Griffin B. Bell (1978), Associate Attorney General Michael J. Egan (1978), Sen. Richard G. Lugar (1978), Sen. John W. Warner (in re: judicial selection in Va., 1981), Brooksley Landau (1981), Judge James T. Carlisle (1987), John M. Ryan (1988), A. Leo Levin (1989); Statement of Attorney General Griffin Bell on selection of Federal Judges and U.S. Attorneys (Feb. 9, 1978); Joseph D. Tydings, Merit Selection Commissions For Federal Judges: A Practical Approach, Remarks before the Rule Day Club, Baltimore (c. 1978); Statement of Larry A. Hammond: Hearing on Judicial Selection Before the H. Select Comm. on Aging, 96th Cong. (1980); Henry J. Abraham, Reflections on the Recruitment, Nomination, and Confirmation Process to the Federal Bench (Sept. 23, 1980)(University of Virginia); text of Law as an Apolitical Art, J. Harvie Wilkinson III, remarks before the Bar Association of the City of Richmond (Law Day, May 2, 1988); documents pertaining to North Carolina SB 218 and SB 219 (Session 1989) Box MSS 82-3e, Box 19

Content Warning

ARVAS is an aggregator of archival resources. ARVAS does not have control of the descriptive language used in our members’ finding aids.

Finding aids may contain historical terms and phrases, reflecting the shared attitudes and values of the community from which they were collected, but are offensive to modern readers. These include demeaning and dehumanizing references to race, ethnicity, and nationality; enslaved or free status; physical or mental ability; religion; sex; and sexual orientation and gender identity.

Many institutions and organizations are in the process of reviewing and revising their descriptive language, with the intent to describe materials in more humanizing, inclusive, and harm-reductive ways. As members revise their descriptive language, their changes will eventually be reflected in their ARVAS finding aids.