Kevin J. O'Connor (Bracewell and Giuliani)

Kevin O’Connor, a former U.S. Attorney in Connecticut and ex-Associate Attorney General, on Thursday announced he will not seek the Republican nomination for governor of Connecticut next year, WFSB, a Hartford television station, reports. The announcement came as O’Connor taped “Face the State,” a political program on WFSB that will air on Sunday.

Last week, Gov. Jodi Rell (R) announced that she will not seek re-election next year and mentioned O’Connor as a possible successor, calling him one of several qualified Republicans; however, she declined to endorse anyone.

O’Connor was the state’s top federal prosecutor from 2002 to April 2008. From January 2006 to April 2006, he also briefly served simultaneously as Associate Deputy Attorney General. In addition, O’Connor in 2007 was then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales‘ chief of staff and in 2008 was confirmed by the Senate as Associate Attorney General. He currently is a partner at Bracewell & Giuliani in Hartford.

When announcing his decision, O’Connor cited family considerations, including his four young children, WFSB reports. He did not, however, rule out a future run for office, according to the television station.

Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.) met with a White House official earlier this month to discuss the U.S. Attorney recommendations for the Middle and Southern districts of Florida, the St. Petersburg Times’ Buzz blog reported yesterday.

George LeMieux (Gov)

LeMieux, who was appointed by Gov. Charlie Crist (R) after Sen. Mel Martinez (R) resigned in September, had a meeting with White House Counsel Greg Craig on Nov. 9, according to the blog. The senator’s office declined to comment to the Buzz about the meeting.

People close to Crist, who will run for Senate next year, are expressing concerns about Jacksonville, Fla., lawyer Harry Shorstein, who, according to the blog, is a finalist for the Middle District of Florida job.

We reported in September that the State Attorney for the state’s 4th Judicial Circuit, Republican Angela Corey, wrote to Martinez and Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) to ask them not to recommend Shorstein, who was her former boss at the office. Two years ago, Shorstein fired Corey and later spoke out against her bid for election to the state prosecuting job. But last year, Corey easily beat Shorstein’s former chief of staff in the bitterly contested election.

The current U.S. Attorney in the Middle District is Bush-administration holdover A. Brian Albritton.

Some of the finalists for the Southern District of Florida are also receiving additional scrutiny in Florida. We reported this week that Daryl E. Trawick, a judge in Dade County, once helped put phony court documents in the public docket at the request of state prosecutors, which could be a violation of state law. In addition, former Assistant U.S. Attorney David M. Buckner, another finalist for the U.S. Attorney post, played a role in a controversial terrorism case.

Jeffrey H. Sloman is the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District.

Here are the finalists for the Middle and Southern district U.S. Attorney posts:

Middle District:

– Harry Shorstein, who is a partner at the Jacksonville law firm of Shorstein & Lasnetski where he works on white-collar crimes cases. He previously served as a Florida state attorney. He has also worked as a general counsel for Jacksonville and as a Naval judge advocate. Read his full bio here.

– Robert O’Neill, who was interim U.S. Attorney for the Middle District in 2008 and currently leads the office’s criminal division.

– Roger Handberg, who is an Assistant U.S. Attorney, in charge of the Middle District’s Orlando office.

Southern District:

– Wifredo Ferrer, who is an assistant Dade County, Fla., attorney.

– David M. Buckner, who is a partner at Miami’s Kozyak Tropin Throckmorton and a former Assistant U.S. Attorney.

— Daryl E. Trawick, who is a Dade County Circuit Court judge.

Assistant Attorney General Tony West (Steve Bagley/Main Justice)

The Justice Department is in the final stages of hammering out a policy that is expected to speed up False Claims Act investigations and increase the flow of information between federal lawyers and their state counterparts.

In an briefing with reporters on Thursday, Assistant Attorney General Tony West, the head of the Civil Division, said Attorney General Eric Holder planned to give him the authority to issue civil investigative demands, which are similar to subpoenas and are used to cull materials and depositions in FCA investigations.

The department is close to implementing the policy, West said, adding that he was “anxious to use that authority in appropriate ways.”

Until recently, only the Attorney General could approve CIDs, but in May Congress passed an anti-fraud bill that, among other things, allowed him to delegate the power.

The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 also gave the Justice Department more freedom to share information gleaned from CIDs with whistleblowers and federal and state agencies, effectively acting as a force multiplier.

“This adds a lot to their investigative abilities,”said James Keneally, a defense lawyer at Kelley Drye & Warren in New York. “We have to watch in coming months is what Justice does with its information. This brings a whole host of law enforcement and regulatory agencies into the fold.”

The Justice Department is working through about 1,000 open FCA investigations. West said the more frequent use of the CIDs, combined with greater information-sharing, will quicken the case flow, allowing the government to recover more tax dollars lost to fraud.

In fiscal year 2009, the Justice Department collected $2.4 billion in settlements and judgments from False Claims Act cases, the second largest recovery since the statute was overhauled more than 20 years ago, according to department figures released Thursday.

Since 1986, when the statute was amended to make it easier for private citizens to sue on behalf of the government, the  Justice Department has recovered $24 billion in FCA cases.

This post has been corrected from an earlier version.

The Justice Department has cleared Kevin Koonce, a former aide to Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), of wrongdoing in the influence-peddling probe focused on Jack Abramoff and his associates.

Koonce’s lawyers, Joshua Berman and Glen Donath of Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, said the department contacted him on Thursday, according to The Washington Post. (Berman also represents Robert Coughlin II, who pleaded guilty to a conflict of interest charge in connection with the probe. His sentencing is scheduled for Tuesday.)

Koonce was under investigation in connection with allegations that he accepted tickets, meals and drinks in return for official actions while he was working as legislative director for Gregg.

The Post and other news outlets reported on the investigation in February, while Gregg was briefly President Barack Obama’s nominee for secretary of commerce. Gregg later asked Obama to withdraw his nomination for unrelated reasons.

Koonce was identified as ”Staffer F” in court documents accompanying the plea agreement of Todd Boulanger, who admitted to honest-services violations earlier this year.

The Public Integrity Section was handling the investigation.

Former Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey and Jack Goldsmith, a former Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, have this piece in today’s Washington Post, defending Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other alleged Sept. 11 perpetrators in a Manhattan federal court.

Comey is general counsel of Lockheed Martin Corp. and Goldsmith teaches at Harvard Law School. Both served during the Bush administration, and both were internal critics of the legal work undergirding some of the most controversial national security policies emanating from then-Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, including the warrantless wiretapping and interrogation programs.

Here, they make the case that Holder’s decision is “reasonable,” noting the unsettled nature of the military commissions and the experience of federal judges and prosecutors in terrorism cases.

“The wisdom of that difficult judgment will be determined by future events,” they write. “But Holder’s critics do not help their case by understating the criminal justice system’s capacities, overstating the military system’s virtues and bumper-stickering a reasonable decision.”

They also directly assault the argument made by former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and others that prosecuting the alleged 9/11 plotters in New York will make the city a bigger target.

“If al-Qaeda could carry out another attack in New York, it would — a fact true a week ago and for a long time,” they write. “Its inability to do so is a testament to our military, intelligence and law enforcement responses since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.”

Goldsmith and Comey poke Holder a bit, pointing out that his stated reasoning behind consigning five men accused of attacking the USS Cole to a military commission rings hollow. (Holder explained that he did so, in part, because the Cole was a military target outside the U.S.)

“The Pentagon was a military target, many aspects of the Sept. 11 attacks were planned abroad, and the Cole attack is already the subject of a federal indictment in New York,” they note. “It is more likely that Holder decided to use a commission system still learning to walk because the Cole case is relatively weak and will benefit from the marginal advantages the commission system offers the government.”

Holder has already been attacked for forum shopping, but Comey and Goldsmith think that criticism is unfair.

“The Bush administration, criticized on similar grounds, properly explained that it would use whatever lawful tool worked best, all things considered, to incapacitate a particular terrorist. Holder’s decisions appear to reflect a similarly pragmatic approach.”

The Justice Department is working to bring “lasting change” in how it handles American Indian issues, according to written testimony from Attorney General Eric Holder submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday.

Holder highlighted various efforts to reach out to American Indians, including the creation of the Nations Leadership Council, which will be composed of tribal 12 leaders, who will meet twice a year to advise the Attorney General on issues affecting Indian country. The Attorney General first announced his decision to establish the council at a DOJ tribal listening session in Minnesota last month.

“By statute and because of its government-to-government relationship with tribes, the United States has a legal duty and moral obligation to address violent crime in Indian country and to assist tribes in their efforts to provide for safe tribal communities,” Holder said in his written testimony. “The Department takes this obligation seriously and is working actively with tribes and Federal agencies to improve all aspects of law enforcement in Indian country.”

Holder said crime in Indian country is “dire.” DOJ is already working with tribal communities to improve public safety and is reassessing its grants to tribal courts, according to the Attorney General.

“Although we have already begun to take action to improve the Department’s
effectiveness in addressing our responsibilities toward Native Americans, a great deal more must be done,” Holder said. “We are working to ensure that these discussions with the tribes will provide the foundation for lasting change in this area.”

The Attorney General also said the Justice Department is improving its efforts to enforce voting rights laws in Indian country. He said the Civil Rights Division intends to bring a suit against Shannon County, S.D., for allegedly failing to defend the voting rights of members of the Lakota tribe, who have limited English proficiency. This would be the first case to defend American Indian voting rights since the Bill Clinton administration, according to Holder.

American Indians could be a pivotal voting block for President Barack Obama, if he runs for reelection in 2012. American Indians tend to vote for Democrats, according to Laura Harris, executive director of Americans for Indian Opportunity, a non-profit American Indian advocacy group, and could provide critical votes for Obama in Western swing states like South Dakota.

We reported earlier month about the significance of the American Indian vote in an article about DOJ Tax Division nominee Mary L. Smith, who is a member of the Cherokee Nation and has the support of several tribal leaders.

Denis McInerney (DavisPolk)

Davis Polk & Wardwell partner Denis McInerney has been hired to lead the Justice Department’s Fraud Section, The BLT reports.

He will replace Steven Tyrrell, who announced he was stepping down this summer. McInerney accepted the position on Thursday, according to The BLT.

Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, the head of the Criminal Division,  told The BLT that McInerney brings an “extraordinary career as a lawyer” to the job.

Firm bio below:

Mr. McInerney is a partner in our Litigation Department, representing corporate and individual clients in grand jury and regulatory investigations, criminal and civil trials, internal investigations and general civil litigation.

From 1989 to 1994, he was an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, serving as a deputy chief of the Criminal Division from 1993 to 1994. In 1994, he served as an Associate Independent Counsel in the Whitewater Investigation with Independent Counsel Robert B. Fiske Jr.

Mr. McInerney has extensive trial experience as a prosecutor and defense attorney, including his service as Second Chair in the criminal trial of Arthur Andersen in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, and as lead trial lawyer for the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of an investment bank who was tried on insider trading charges in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Barry R. Grissom (Law Office of Barry R. Grissom)

Rep. Dennis Moore (D-Kan.) has recommended Overland Park, Kan., attorney Barry Grissom to be the state’s next top federal prosecutor, The Kansas City Star reports. Grissom, who has a private law practice specializing in civil litigation with a focus on employment discrimination, was a legal adviser to Moore during his first two congressional races, the newspaper reports. Grissom told The Star, “It’d be an honor to have a job like this,” adding, “It’d be an opportunity to serve and serving under this administration would be a double honor.”

Dan Watkins, an attorney in Lawrence, Kan., had applied for the position, according to The Star, but withdrew from consideration last month. The last Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney in the state was Eric F. Melgren. He served from 2002 to 2008, when he resigned to become a federal judge in Kansas. Since Melgren’s departure, Lanny D. Welch has been in charge of the office, serving as interim U.S. Attorney.

Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats Thursday were still unable to garner much Republican support today for legislation that would make it harder for courts to order reporters to divulge their sources, despite making several changes to the bill.

The panel adopted a substitute amendment offered by Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania at a committee markup session that would  add more national security protections to the bill, which is known as the Free Flow of Information Act of 2009. The panel approved the amendment by unanimous consent, but a slew of threatened GOP amendments prevented the committee from taking a final vote on the measure, which has had the bill on its agenda since April. Specter is also the principal sponsor of the underlying bill.

Republicans have been skeptical of the bill’s effect on national security. The bill and substitute amendment have just one Republican sponsor from the committee – Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

“The language is not yet perfect,” Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) told his colleagues. The Judiciary panel Thursday rejected two Kyl amendments addressing some of the GOP’s national security concerns.

According to the Specter substitute amendment approved on Thursday:

– The Attorney General would be required to determine whether a request for information from a journalist is in accordance with the U.S. Attorney’s Manual.

– Journalists would bear the burden of showing that it is necessary for them to withhold requested information when the court balances a request for journalists to divulge information.

– The bill’s national security language would be expanded, giving the courts more power when ruling on requests involving national security issues.

– The bill would include more specific language on the qualifications for a journalist. The proposed language does not cover an individual who is a terrorist or involved in terrorism.

Attorney General Eric Holder supports the changes to the legislation.

In a letter sent to the panel  earlier this month, Holder and National Intelligence Director Dennis C. Blair said the Specter amendment is a “significant step forward from previous versions.”

“We appreciate the critical role that the media plays in a free and democratic society,” Holder and Blair wrote in the letter. “This legislation provides robust judicial protection for journalists’ confidential source, while also enabling the government to take measures necessary to protect national security and enforce our criminal laws.”

Stephen Miller, a spokesman for the Judiciary Committee’s top Republican, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, told The Washington Post that the letter from Holder and Blair was “woefully short and left many questions unanswered.”

It will be at least another two weeks until the committee can vote on final passage of the media shield because of the Thanksgiving holiday next week.

Committee Democrats are irked that the media shield bill has languished in the committee since April, but Kyl charged today that panel Democrats have not included him and other Republicans who are opposed to the bill in private meetings about the legislation, forcing the committee to spend a significant amount of time discussing the bill during open markups.

Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) urged them to set up meetings with the bill’s sponsors. But he said the bill’s sponsors should put the bill on the Senate calendar and skip a committee vote, if Republicans are “unwilling to cooperate.”

“I remain committed to establishing a meaningful federal shield law,” Leahy said in a statement. “I am disappointed that after seven months this committee was not able to report the Free Flow of Information Act today.”

The House passed its version of the bill in March.

When the White House announced its picks to fill the open seats at the Federal Trade Commission earlier this week, Main Justice checked in with former associates of both nominees.

Julie Brill (Columbia Law School)

Both names have been rumored for months: Julie Brill is a consumer watchdog, boasting service with the attorneys general of both North Carolina and Vermont, and Edith Ramirez is an intellectual property litigator from California.

But neither is as well known in Washington antitrust circles as previous FTC appointees.

Of the current commissioners, J. Thomas Rosch previously worked at the FTC and was an antitrust partner at Latham & Watkins;  William E. Kovacic was a professor at George Washington University Law School; and Chairman Jon Leibowitz spent more than a decade on Capitol Hill, including a stint with the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee.

But former colleagues and other observers have high praise for both recent nominees. David Balto, an antitrust expert with the left-leaning Center for American Progress, told Main Justice that Brill and Ramirez were “exceptional appointments,” with a “strong commitment to public service.”

Edith Ramirez (Quinn Emanuel)

While the current makeup of the commission skews toward traditional antitrust experience, experts say the new appointments add some diversity. “Now add an IP [intellectual property] expert and somebody who has terrific background in state enforcement,” said Stephen Calkins, a former FTC official and professor at Wayne State University Law School, “this mix of expertises is just what the FTC founders contemplated.”

A graduate of Princeton University and New York University Law School, Brill spent most of her career at the Attorney General’s office in Vermont. Her former boss, Vermont AG William Sorrell, told Main Justice she has a “tremendous record” on privacy and other consumer protection issues, including taking on drug marketers and “safe” cigarettes.

When the office received one complaint about phone service provider MCI unlawfully accessing customer credit histories, Sorrell said, Brill pursued the case and got MCI to send $100 checks to 14,000 Vermont residents.

When the office created an antitrust unit earlier in the decade, Brill was its hard-charging director, Sorrell said. After the Justice Department had already signed off on a dairy industry acquisition by Dean Foods, Brill brought a case challenging the merger on behalf of the state of Vermont.  ”It shows how aggressive she is,” said Balto.

Other lawyers have also taken notice. At a recent trade association meeting, Sorrell said, he heard from other attorneys that the fear of appearing on a panel with Brill was palpable. “One of those folks said he would lose sleep a night or two beforehand because she’s so sharp,” he said.

Ramirez is a partner at the Los Angeles-based Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, a firm known both for its aggressive trial lawyers and its quirky sensibilities. (The firm’s tag line was “Justice may be blind, but she still sees it our way 92.3 percent of the time.”)

She was a Harvard Law School classmate and an early supporter of Obama. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, she gave Obama $250 in 2003, when his candidacy for an Illinois Senate seat was still in its infancy.  She continued to support Obama with donations of $500 and $750 through 2007, and served as a deputy political director in California and director of Latino outreach during his presidential campaign. She has also contributed to other Democratic causes, according to the Center’s database.

Ramirez’s colleague, Quinn Emanuel name partner A. William Urquhart, told Main Justice: “She is extremely smart, she served on Harvard Law Review with the president, she has great judgment, and she has a fairly extensive knowledge of the law, particularly in the IP arena which I assume will serve her well with the FTC.” Another colleague, Hal Barza, who heads the firm’s antitrust practice, called Ramirez an “absolutely brilliant lawyer.”

In a patent case before the International Trade Commission, Barza said, she also proved her mettle in dealing with stressful situations. A lawyer from New York tried to physically take over the podium while Ramirez was speaking, Barza said, but she managed to take it back. “It was good,” Barza said, with a chuckle, “she’s not that large.”

The nominations have been referred to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.