Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts

Amy K. Matsui is Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts at the National Women’s Law Center. She works on economic issues affecting low- and moderate-income women and families, with special emphasis on federal and state tax policy and women’s retirement security. Her work with retirement savings policy and federal and state tax credits for working families comprises policy analysis, federal advocacy, and public education and outreach. She also directs the Center's advocacy efforts around federal judicial nominations and diversity in the federal judiciary. Ms. Matsui has worked at the Center since 2002. Prior to joining the Center, Ms. Matsui practiced commercial law in the private sector. She clerked for the Honorable Carolyn Dineen King, then-Chief Judge of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in 2000. She is a graduate of the University of California at Berkeley, and Stanford Law School.

Expert in: Tax Credits Outreach, Judicial Nominations, Family Tax Credits, Social Security, Supreme Court, Judges & the Courts, Social Security & Retirement
  • Printer-friendly version
  • Send by email

My Take

Supreme Court Term Begins Today: Why Women Are Watching

Posted by
Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts
Emily Martin, Vice President and General Counsel
| Posted on: October 01, 2012 at 02:43 pm

Today, the Supreme Court heard the first arguments of the 2012-13 Term. A number of cases that the Court will review this Term could have a significant impact on women’s legal rights.

This Term, the Court’s review of affirmative action policies in state university admissions presents a troubling opportunity to turn back the clock, particularly given that Justice O’Connor, a key vote in the Court’s 2003 decision upholding affirmative action in admissions (and its author), has since left the Court. In Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the University of Texas’s undergraduate admissions policy, which uses race as one of multiple factors in making admissions decisions, was constitutional under the Supreme Court’s aforementioned 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger.  Affirmative action policies intended to promote not only racial but also gender diversity are particularly necessary in vocational and higher education—for example, by eliminating barriers to women’s entrance into historically male-dominated fields, such as engineering and computer science. The Center submitted an amicus brief in support of the University of Texas, explaining that an educational experience in a diverse community of learners can dispel both race and gender stereotypes, which are often intertwined, and that this diversity is essential to preparing students to succeed as leaders in communities and businesses. Fisher will be argued next Wednesday.

Read more...
Tags: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, Issues Before the Courts, Supreme Court, Supreme Court, Judges & the Courts | Add new comment

Because of Minority’s Obstruction, Senate Accomplishes 2/17 of What It Could Have; Punts 19 Judicial Nominations To Lame Duck

Posted by Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts | Posted on: September 25, 2012 at 12:19 pm

Last week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to allow the Senate to vote on 17 district court nominees. Despite the historically high level of vacancies, the significant number of nominees (12) who would fill judicial emergencies, and the fact that most of these 17 nominees were voted out of committee without objection, obstruction won the day. And, indeed, the whole session: the Senate adjourned early in the morning of September 22nd, having voted on 2 district court nominees, for a total of 3 votes on district court judges in its entire September work period. Not what you’d call impressive by any means.

Read more...
Tags: Judicial Nominees, Obstruction, Judicial Nominations, Judges & the Courts | Add new comment

Confirmation of Female District Court Judge Highlights Progress on Diversity of Judicial Nominees

Posted by Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts | Posted on: September 12, 2012 at 09:42 am

On Monday, the Senate confirmed Stephanie Rose, nominated to a district court seat in Iowa. As the Huffington Post noted, with Judge Rose’s confirmation, as many female federal judges have been confirmed in the Obama Administration as were confirmed in President George Bush’s 8 years in office. As a result, the percentage of female federal judges has increased between 2008 (PDF) and 2012. 

Obama nominees have been more diverse not only in terms of gender, but also race, ethnicity and other important kinds of diversity, than nominees in any prior presidential administration. As Marcia Greenberger stated in the article, “At this time, it's beyond dispute that having a diverse set of judges improves the quality of justice for everybody.” But there is clearly more progress to be made.

Read more...
Tags: Judicial Nominees, Women in the Judiciary, Judicial Nominations, Judges & the Courts | Add new comment

Judicial Nominations Preview: Looking Ahead to September

Posted by Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts | Posted on: August 31, 2012 at 10:42 am

It’s the last week of August, and just as millions of kids around the country are zipping up their backpacks for the first time in many months, so too the Senate will be preparing to come back into session after Labor Day. Between the political conventions, religious holidays, and Senators’ desire to campaign in their states before the November elections, there’s not much time to actually conduct the people’s business in September. But there’s a lot to do.

One must-do priority is confirming the backlog of judicial nominees – and if longstanding Senate practices were followed, this could be accomplished quickly and easily. Right now, there are 18 nominees to federal district courts around the county who have been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and are simply waiting for a vote to be scheduled. It may come as a surprise if you’ve been watching Congress lately, but the Senate could confirm all of these nominees in a block, in a single scheduled vote. Indeed, as Senator Patrick Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has reminded us in recent months, the Senate routinely used to vote on groups of nominees, as many as 18 at a time. 

Read more...
Tags: Judicial Nominees, Judiciary Committee, Senate, Judicial Nominations, Judges & the Courts | Add new comment

Tenth Circuit Nominee With Bipartisan Support Is Filibustered. Incredible.

Posted by Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts | Posted on: July 31, 2012 at 01:13 pm

Last night, a cloture vote was held on the nomination of Robert Bacharach to an Oklahoma-based seat on the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. The cloture vote failed, which is to say, his nomination was filibustered.

As I mentioned last week, Judge Bacharach has a stellar legal resume and, supposedly, the strong support of his home-state Senators Coburn and Inhofe. That unqualified support manifested itself yesterday in the form of those two Senators voting “present,” rather than “yes” or “no.” Unfortunately for Judge Bacharach, his supporters’ “presents” did not count as votes to cut off debate, so a vote to confirm him cannot go forward at this time.

Read more...
Tags: Judicial Nominees, Obstruction, Judicial Nominations, Judges & the Courts | Add new comment