Having filled two vacancies on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Biden is now seeking to fill the last with state judge Daniel Calabretta, who would be, if confirmed, the first LGBTQ judge on the Eastern District’s bench.
Background
Born Daniel Joe Powell, Calabretta received a B.A. from Princeton University in 2000 and a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School in 2003. He then clerked for Judge William Fletcher on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and then for Justice John Paul Stevens on the U.S. Supreme Court. His class on the Supreme Court that session included future federal judges Julius Richardson (Rehnquist) and Martha Pacold (Thomas). After his clerkships, Calabretta joined Munger, Tolles & Olson as an associate. In 2008, Calabretta joined the California Attorney General’s Office under Jerry Brown and then joined Brown’s gubernatorial staff in 2013.
In 2018, Brown named Calabretta to the Sacramento County Superior Court, where he has served since.
History of the Seat
Calabretta has been nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, to a seat vacated on April 27, 2022 by Judge John Mendez.
Legal Experience
Calabretta started his legal career as a law clerk on the Ninth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court but then spent three years at Munger Tolles and Olson, a firm that has produced numerous federal judges, including Ninth Circuit Judges Paul Watford, John Owens, Michelle Freidland, Dan Collins, and Gabriel Sanchez, as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Calabretta subsequently spent five years at the California Attorney General’s Office. During that time, Calabretta represented the Attorney General’s office in the suit challenging California’s ban on same sex marriage. See Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 630 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 2011). He also represented the state in a lawsuit regarding the funding and construction of a state prison hospital. See Rich Saskal, Receiver Offers California Break In Prison Health Care Lawsuit, The Bond Buyer, Oct. 7, 2008. Calabretta also argued before the Ninth Circuit in this role, defending California’s practice of collecting DNA samples from those facing felony charges. See Paul Elias, Calif. AG Defends DNA Samples from Felony Arrestees, A.P. State & Local Wire, July 13, 2010.
Finally, Calabretta spent five years working for Governor Jerry Brown as deputy legal affairs secretary before his appointment to the bench.
Jurisprudence
Since 2018, Calabretta has served as a Superior Court judge in Sacramento County. In this role, she presides over civil, criminal, and domestic cases. Calabretta currently serves as presiding judge on the Juvenile Court.
Writings and Statements
While at Munger, Calabretta co-authored a regular column with fellow Munger lawyers and Supreme Court clerks Friedland (O’Connor), Jeff Bleich (Rehnquist), and Aimee Feinberg (Breyer) discussing the Supreme Court. For example, one column from 2007 discusses the lack of cameras at the Supreme Court, suggesting changes that the Court can take to be more accessible such as releasing oral argument recordings on the same day of the argument (the Supreme Court currently releases transcripts the same day and audio at the end of the week). See Jeff Bleich, Michelle Freidland, Aimee Feinberg, and Daniel Powell, Supreme Court Watch: A Court Without Cameras, 33 San Francisco Att’y 52 (Winter 2007).
In another column, the foursome discuss the jurisprudence of Justice John Paul Stevens, describing him as “independent and hard to categorize politically.” See Jeff Bleich, Michelle Freidland, Aimee Feinberg, and Daniel Powell, Supreme Court Watch: John Paul Stevens – An Independent Voice, 33 San Francisco Att’y 44 (Spring 2007).
In a notable column, the authors discuss Chief Justice Roberts’ commitment to precedent, noting: “In a series of high-profile decisions this term, the Court expressed continued respect for precedents while effectively overruling them or limiting them to their narrow facts.” Jeff Bleich, Michelle Freidland, Aimee Feinberg, and Daniel Powell, Supreme Court Watch: Stealth Overrulings – Overturning Precedent Without Saying So, 33 San Francisco Att’y 43 (Fall 2007). The column goes on to discuss a number of rulings that go against prior precedent, without expressly overruling them, including the Gonzales v. Carhart decision that upheld a ban on “partial-birth abortion” seven years after the Court overruled such a ban in Stenberg v. Carhart.
Overall Assessment
The Eastern District of California has consistently been one of the most overworked courts in the country, and one desperately in need of new judges. As such, Calabretta’s nomination is likely welcome news to the court’s judges. Furthermore, Calabretta brings to the job both lawyerly and judicial experience and would likely be deemed to be well qualified for the bench.
However, Calabretta’s biggest enemy in his confirmation this Congress is time. As he is on the agenda for a Judiciary hearing this week, he should be able to be confirmed before the end of the year. If he is not, his fate depends on the composition of the new Senate.
The Vetting Room 
Another CA district court nominee with a traditional background up to their nomination. While well qualified, I’d rather like to see nominees from non-traditional/underrepresented legal backgrounds.
LikeLike
As a former SCOTUS clerk, he is definitely a prime candidate for elevation to the 9th circuit down the row.
LikeLike
Daniel Calabretta is another example of a Biden nominee who is a white male, yet still adds diversity to the federal bench. Not only is he LGBT but also young & has a decent background. Good pick.
LikeLike
As mentioned, time is Calabretta’s biggest enemy. None of his rulings as judge have drawn much scrutiny.
LikeLike
Agreed Dequan. Great pick. Of course the one time the conservative poster above has a problem with a traditional background it is with a white gay male. Disgusting that homophobic bigots still exist even from people who pretend to be on our side.
LikeLike
On another topic, I just saw that a lawsuit by the “Job Creators Network Foundation” seeking to overturn Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan has been assigned to Judge Reed O’Connor (NDTX). I’m pretty worried. He has a history.
LikeLike
Judge Reed O’Connor will probably issue an injunction but at the end of the day it will be appealed to the circuit courts just like most big cases. Which is why it’s so disheartening that there are two vacancies in the 5th circuit & the senate is in recess this week & next instead of confirming Dana Douglas & the rest of the circuit court nominees. Plus there’s not even a nominee for the other vacancy. We haven’t had a new batch since September 2nd.
LikeLike
I tend to doubt there will be another batch until after the midterms when it is known for sure who will have control of the Senate come January.
LikeLike
You’re probably right Ethan. My hope is the administration has two sets of nominees in waiting. One for if Republicans gain control & another for if Democrats hold the senate.
If Democrats lose in the midterms, I hope Schumer plans to have the senate in session Monday to Friday each week they are working until the end of the term to confirm all pending nominees. That’s the least he can do after cancelling two extra weeks this month, not cancelling any of the August recess & having a three day work week.
Tomorrow will be a good day with Durbin holding a SJC hearing with six nominees. It could be a GREAT day if tomorrow it’s also announced there will be another hearing next week Wednesday as well since the senate was suppose to be in session & there won’t be another hearing until after the midterms. But unfortunately that won’t happen albeit it would if the shoe was on the other foot & Republicans were in the majority…smh
LikeLike
I bet there are also a bunch of circuit judges who are waiting for the midterm results before deciding whether or not to take senior status. To review, here are all the Democrat appointed circuit judges who have yet to announce senior status in order of how long they’ve been eligible (not including King of the 4th circuit who retracted his decision after his preferred successor wasn’t chosen or Rawlinson of the 9th circuit who has hinted she would use a similar tactic. also not including federal circuit):
-James Dennis (5th circuit)
-Eric Clay (6th circuit)
-Karen Nelson Moore (6th circuit)
-Ronald Gould (9th circuit)
-Carl Stewart (5th circuit)
-Roger Gregory (4th circuit)
-Kim McLane Wardlaw (9th circuit)
-Charles Wilson (11th circuit)
-Scott Matheson (10th circuit)
-James Wynn (4th circuit)
-Jane Stranch (6th circuit)
eligible on 11/16: Joseph Greenaway (3rd circuit)
eligible on 11/19: James Graves (5th circuit)
Gregory is probably waiting till his term as Chief is over. Are there any on here that you think wouldn’t go senior with both a D President and D Senate.
LikeLike
I was just thinking about the exact same thing the other night. I think the most likely to go senior if Dems hold the senate over the next two years are the following;
Dennis (5th circuit) – Already announced & Dana Douglas has already been nominated.
-Eric Clay (6th circuit)
-Ronald Gould (9th circuit) – Probably more likely now that Jamal Whitehead has been nominated to the district court.
-Carl Stewart (5th circuit)
-James Wynn (4th circuit)
LikeLike
I accidentally put Dennis. I sometimes confuse Dennis, Graves, and Wynn, as they’re all black male appellate judges named James.
LikeLike
I figured that… Haaaa
If Graves retires, I’m sure the administration would consider Scott Colom who they want to nominate to the district court but the senators won’t turn in their blue slips. I think the real question is if Democrats gain a seat or two, can Durbin sustain pressure for two more years to keep blue slips in place for district court seats. I hope he gets rid of them once & for all in that scenario or we will have dozens of seats that won’t even get a nominee.
LikeLike
Latrice Westbrooks of the Mississippi Court of Appeals would be another possibility for a 5th circuit seat in Mississippi. But Colom is younger and we do need more black men on circuit courts. When does Gregory’s term as Chief on the 4th circuit end?
LikeLike
Roger Gregory’s term as chief should end next year. I think if the Mississippi senators played it smart like the Indians senators did, they could get a more moderate nominee for a 5th vacancy. Im not sure they are capable of playing nice though so hopefully that would push Biden to the left for a nominee. I don’t know the Mississippi equivalent of Julie Rikelman but somebody in that mold would be great.
LikeLike
@Dequan
If Judge Graves retires from the 5th Circuit, District Judge Carlton Reeves would be the most obvious choice. But he has a controversial record. Progressives would enjoy watching conservative heads explode, but I’m not sure he could be confirmed.
Another state judge would be Deborah McDonald. Her age could be a problem, but she seems to be very well-qualified.
LikeLike
I certainly hope Carlton W. Reeves wouldn’t be the nominee. He is 58 years old plus we would have to backfill his district court seat with the Mississippi senators’ blue slips. He would have been a great choice 10 years ago though in my mind.
LikeLike
The next hearing date after this week will probably be Nov 16 with Wamble and Benjamin most likely in that one. The next truly open date would be Nov 30 and there’s virtually no chance those nominees would be confirmed prior to the end of the year.
SJC may elect to simply use that spot to catch up on district nominees and then announce any future nominees pending the results of the election
LikeLike
The election is on November 8th. It would be nice if they could come to work that Wednesday & Thursday, but I guess they need a week off from their two weeks off that was preceded by their extra two weeks off.
So unfortunately, you are correct, the next likely SJC hearing will be November 16th. I mean it’s not like there are any pressing issues they need to come back to work for (Sarcastic voice).
LikeLike
Ohh I agree, it’s definitely ridiculous. And we’re just talking hearings, it’s not like we’re expecting any contentious votes where we would need Warnock, CCM, or Kelly (none of whom are on SJC anyway).
LikeLike
They could have cancelled both this & next week Monday since they only take one vote anyway. Just a full Tuesday, Wednesday & the half day on both Thursday’s. Imagine they hold the gay marriage vote & maybe an abortion votes this week or next. Let the GOP vote them down & the news coverage would have been so good for Democrats.
Then of course use the rest of the time to discharge & confirm judges. I just don’t see how two extra weeks of not campaigning would be better than six extra days of showing the American people you’re fighting for them is a better strategy.
LikeLike
Funny looking back at the James Ho vote for the 5th circuit. Three Democrats voted for him, Donnelly (D-IN), Heitkamp (D-ND) & McCaskill (D-MO). And all three lost in re-election. When Democrats stand up & fight, they stand a better chance at winning. When they try to act like Republicans, they usually don’t excite their base, & still rarely get Republicans to vote for them anyway.
LikeLiked by 1 person
At the time, they probably didn’t realize how useful an asset Ho would be for conservatives.
LikeLike
@Ryan Joshi
Yea I agree. That’s the problem… Lol
Same for the 4 Democrats that voted for Clarence Thomas. And I’m that case their votes could have actually kept him off the SCOTUS. Democrats sense on principle & precedent. Republicans do as well until it’s no infer convent for them then they can care less.
Republicans say they are the anti abortion, anti violent crime party. Hershel Walker has committed multiple acts of violence against his former wife & paid for one abortion & tried for a second. Yet they are falling in line behind him like a running back behind the best offensive line in the league just to win a senate seat. The two sides are not the same sadly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
4? There were 12 Democrats who voted to confirm Clarence Thomas, and yes the Dems had a senate majority at the time (though a lot of the Democratic yea votes for Thomas were from conservative Southern Democrats)
LikeLike
Oh sorry, I meant to say a 4 bite swing would have kept Clarence off SCOTUS. But yes 11 voted for him & many were Southerners. Of course those were different times but I just hope Democrats have learned next time they are in the minority. Let’s hope that’s not this January.
LikeLike
I never realized this until someone on instagram pointed it out, but according to Republican logic, Herschel Walker has allegedly paid to have his baby murdered. This proves that the GOP is all about power and doesn’t actually care about abortion.
LikeLike
Absolutely. The only thing Republicans care about is POWER. Consistency, precedent, morals & hypocrisy mean nothing to them if it denies them that. But I give them credit. I remember when Obama was president, Bill Maher said on his HBO show he wished Obama had some GW Bush in him. Not his policies, but just the ability to get things done, even if they are opposed by the other party or even a majority of Americans.
That’s what the Democrats need. The SJC is not having a hearing next Wednesday only for one reason, because it would break with precedent. Republicans would have had a hearing tomorrow, next Wednesday & the day before Thanksgiving while turkey was cooking in the oven if they had this many nominees pending. Hell they had a hearing in December 2020 shortly before Christmas for a 1st circuit court nominee. I want the Democrats to act more like Republicans except they actually have good policies on top of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Latrice Westbrooks would be the best of the Mississippi Courts of Appeals judges, as she has done pro bono work for the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU, and NAACP.
LikeLike
As usual Ethan comes through with a name, I never heard of… Lol
Latrice Westbrooks sounds like a very good pick. She worked with the Mississippi Center for Justice, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Mississippi Youth Justice Project and the ACLU. I wish she was born a little later then 1971 but I would be happy if she or Scott Colom were the nominee. I hope the Monday after the election is similar to the Monday aft er the end of the NFL regular season where a lot of vacancies occur in one day. Hopefully the Dems maintain (Or increase) their majority & a number of judges announce senior status within a week.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anyone involved with that many interest groups would face a tough road in securing any Republican votes, especially if the Senate was 50-50 again.
LikeLike
Unless senators Manchin, Sinema or VP Harris would oppose her then the only thing harder about her getting confirmed over anybody else is an additional 4 hours. I think that’s worth sticking it to the Mississippi senators if they don’t want to play ball.
LikeLike
Looks like the SJC will have another hearing next week Tuesday. No reason why they can’t have a judicial hearing next week Wednesday while they will be in town.
(https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/breaking-the-logjam-part-2-the-office-of-legal-counsels-role-in-shaping-executive-privilege-doctrine)
LikeLike
They should have the business meeting Thurs….It would only take 2 seconds as the nominees would be held over…..But getting the held over out of the way then they could be confirmed week they come back……Included in the next batch will be Julie Rikelman..
LikeLike
That’s right. Either this Thursday or next Thursday, which ever they prefer. But lately they have had a hearing on Wednesday, no executive meeting the following Thursday (8 days later), hold over the next Thursday (15 days later) & vote the following Thursday (22 days later). Even if the Republicans have additional questions, they still should hold the nominees over the following Thursday (8 days later).
LikeLike
@Ethan
I am going through your chart. You have significantly increased the names for possible judges in New Jersey. Some great additions. It makes me even more mad at the bad judges we have gone from that state so far. But with two pending vacancies, hopefully we get wo nominees form your list or similar nominees.
LikeLike
I have indeed. Some of them wouldn’t have been in contention then since they were replacements for those that were selected. Obviously Christine O’Hearn and Karen Williams were terrible. Evelyn Padin was too old but would’ve been decent if she were a decade younger. Julien Neals is okay, but I wouldn’t want him elevated since he is approaching 60. Although I do wonder if he will be elevated as he is a black man like Greenaway. While not progressive by any means, I’m fine with Zahid Qurashi, as he is under 50 and became the first Muslim federal judge. And Georgette Castner is young and the first federal judge with significant experience in cannabis law. I don’t expect Greenaway to go senior in the immediate future, but obviously Rachel Wainer Apter would be the best choice. Rutgers Law Professor Alexis Karterton might be even more progressive. And Fabiana Pierre-Louis, while not bad, would be my third choice.
LikeLike
Sadly, I don’t see a New Jersey 3rd circuit vacancy coming anytime soon either. But if one did, Rachel Wainer Apter would be my first choice with Fabiana Pierre-Louis right behind her as a history making choice. They both were born less than one month apart so age is not a factor. But no reason not to fill those last two district court vacancies with young rock stars to add to the bench. The White House Counsel’s office should just take your list & pick two… Lol
LikeLike
Have you looked into Karterton at all? She’s super progressive, but definitely not confirmable in a GOP controlled Senate.
LikeLike
I never heard of her before tonight, but Alexis Karterton was the reason I noticed you added the names. I look at the circuit court recommendations first & my fingers stopped moving my computer mouse immediately when it crossed her “Notes/other experiences” section… Haaaaa
Add on her being a law professor (I have been very vocal about the need for more of them), a black woman & her being 44 years old, & it was love at first sight… Lol
LikeLike
Biden isn’t a fan of law professors as federal judges, and that goes back to his days as chair on the SJC. I’d think that Castner is the obvious choice should there be a future opening there.
LikeLike
why does Biden not like law professors as federal judges? I think that more law professors should be picked for federal judgeships.
LikeLike
There’s no “obvious” choice when it comes to judicial selection in NJ. How obvious is O’Hearn?
And there’s a lot of things that olden days Biden didn’t like that current Biden has warmed up to. He could be made to like law professors, especially if senator persistently send him them as nominees for district courts.
For me, having more law professors nominated and confirmed in a Dem senate post-2022 is essential.
LikeLike
@Ryan Joshi
If Dems hold the senate, I truly hope law professors is an area we see more nominees for, particularly for the circuit courts. Here is my order of underrepresented groups I want to see more Biden nominees for over the next two years, with of course each being young & progressive;
1. Hispanics
2. Black men
3. Law professors
4. Native American
5. LGBT
6. AAPI
7. Disabled
8. Muslim
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gavi, O’Hearn was an obvious pick for that seat as she has connections to both NJ senators.
LikeLike
I don’t have particularly high hopes, but an additional executive meeting would be very good news indeed. There’s been plenty of time for nominees to submit additional info, so I see no reason why they couldn’t at least be considered and held over this week or next, with a full vote on Nov 17.
LikeLike
Senator Grassley already starting off complaining why Durbin is hearing a hearing today. Hypocrisy at its finest
LikeLike
Anything noteworthy from todays hearings? I assume that Johnstones vote should be relatively smooth but curious about the other five.
LikeLike
Only one Republican, Chuck Grassley Zoom in to ask questions & he only asked Johnstone questions. He didn’t stay for the second panel. This should have been the hearing for Rikelman. Nothing noteworthy at all.
LikeLike
Thanks Dequan. Pretty pathetic that no one even bothered to show up, but ohh well.
Rikelman is almost certainly going to be tied up anyway, so I’m fine with working her in earlier. I just hope Schumer is ready and moves quickly to have her discharged and confirmed.
LikeLike
I feel like more Republicans would’ve shown up on Zoom if Rikelman had been on today. Of course we will never know.
LikeLike
The one thing noteworthy for me is not hearing whether Steve Daines supports the nominee or have returned his blue slip.
I assume that Daines doesn’t actively support Johnstone. For this hearing, senators who didn’t show up to speak in support of the nominee from their state at least submitted a statement for the record. Ohio’s Rob Portman is in this category. Daines had no such statement of support entered into the record.
Also, there was no word as to whether Daines returned his blue slip. I assume that he did, as that would probably be a huge talking point for Grassley.
I regret that there wasn’t another circuit nominee. Not only to clear the deck, but to also give the maximum two nominees a cakewalk hearing. So yeah, what Dequan said. This should have been Rikelman’s hearing week.
LikeLike
I highly doubt senator Daines turned in his blue slip. I’ve watched ever SJC hearing & Durbin has been loud & clear every time a Republican has turned in his blue slip. Not only did Durbin not mention it but Daines also released a statement which, while he didn’t state if he would turn it in or not, leads me to believe he won’t.
Either way thanks to the Republicans it doesn’t matter. Hopefully the same will be for district court nominees & hopefully unlike circuit court nominees, this time Democrats get rid of them first.
LikeLike
Hopefully the Dems hold the senate but if they don’t, there needs to be a full-scale sprint to the finish to confirm every pending nominee. They should be working Monday through Friday to make up for the entire August recess & extra two-week recess in October. Anything less & that would explain why they lost the senate in the first place.
LikeLike
I really hope Dems retain the senate, because otherwise that would be a mad dash to fill the 12 appellate and 30-35 district nominees. Especially so once you consider that Warnock will in all likelihood be campaigning for the bulk of the month of November for a potential runoff.
LikeLike
If Dems lose Nevada, they really need to flip Pennsylvania. Then need a flip in either Ohio, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Utah or Florida. Any flips in two of those states should seal at worst a 50/50 split. But they really need to bet a seat or two because the 2024 map looks really rough even with a presidential year wave.
LikeLike
I don’t see Florida happening. Utah seems unlikely, Trump under polled there but won comfortably.
Pennsylvania is still John Fetterman’s to lose, but now he may actually lose it. So Pennsylvania is like Florida was in the 2000 Presidential election or Ohio was in 2004, ground zero.
LikeLike
Why do you think Georgia will go to a runoff?
LikeLike
Warnock out performed Ossoff so hopefully he can peel off enough independents to get to 50%. I also expect with 3 weeks & 6 days left, Walker will put his foot in his mouth at least one more time before Election Day.
LikeLike
There is a Libertarian and an Independent running, so I assume those two will soak up 3-4% of the vote. Just a hunch, but I suspect we will see something like Warnock winning 49-48 and then everyone has to wait this race out a few more weeks.
And Dequan, I agree. Ideally Dems would end up with 52-53 to give themselves some cushion for the 2024 cycle. As it stands though I’d be very happy with 51 (hold current seats plus flip PA).
LikeLike
I expect that Georgia will go into a runoff again. Privately, Georgia Republicans are P.O.’d at Trump for arranging this nomination. They’re hoping that Daily Beast article is not true.
LikeLike
They all know the Daily Beast article is true. We just have to hope more than 1 or 2% care that it’s true. If I was a better man I would put my money on the under when it comes to Republicans.
LikeLike
At the next business meeting, I hope Durbin has ALL the nominees brought up for vote….The Rikelman group as well as the 6 from today….There is no reason to have only the nominees from the Rikelman panel from Sept on one panel then have today’s panel another week…..By the time the committee meets next, it will be Nov, so all the nominees can have their held over week together, followed by committee votes probably 1st week in December…
LikeLike
“There is no reason to have only the nominees from the Rikelman panel from Sept on one panel then have today’s panel another week”
I agree with you in spirit but it’s counter to the rules. Nominees need to be placed on the agenda and be held over at least once (when requested by the minority, which is almost always) in order to be ripe for final SJC vote. So don’t look for yesterday’s nominees on the same agenda as the previous six.
Post-hearing sequence is worth reminding:
Answer all written questions
THEN
Place on business meeting’s agenda
THEN
Held over
THEN
SJC vote
LikeLike
@Gavi
But in this case for example, the nominees for yesterday have a deadline of next Wednesday for all questions to be sent in. There is no executive meeting next Thursday so whenever the next one is, all nominees should have all questions answered by then. So they should be able to be on the agenda to be held over alone with the Rikelman group.
LikeLike
Dequan, the deadline is for senators to submit the questions, not for the nominees to answer them. Usually, the chair encourages the nominees to answer them as soon as possible.
At any rate, have you seen Durbin put two batches on the agenda before? I don’t see Durbin having twelve nominees in the same business meeting.
LikeLike
I remember seeing it, albeit only once before. Hopefully with the long layoff this will be the second time
LikeLike
I have an unrelated question. Back in January, Tia Johnson was nominated for the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces but no action has been taken on her. Is she controversial or did she just fall through the cracks?
LikeLike
They probably feel Tia Johnson could be confirmed under a Republican majority. Plus the Armed Forces Court isn’t a lifetime appointment so no rush with her nomination.
LikeLike
Senator Reed tried to get her confirmed by voice vote a few weeks ago, but Hawley objected due to Afghanistan.
LikeLike
As a Georgia resident, I think Warnock can pull it off, but I’m much more bullish on Abrams. But a new Quinnipiac poll released in the last 24 hours showed her down only by only 1%. I feel she would have absolutely no chance if not for the Dobbs decision, as cynical as that is.
LikeLike
The latest polls I saw for Abrams a week or two ago showed her down by about 3%. So if the polls now show she’s only down by 1%, that’s good news for her. I was hoping Trump would interfere more in the governors race with Kemp certifying the 2020 election but he’s relatively stayed away from the governors race l.
LikeLike
The Governor’s race that I’m the most nervous about is Arizona. I’d take four more years of Kemp in Georgia if it guaranteed Kari Lake doesn’t win in Arizona. But in Georgia, our GOP Lieutenant Governor nominee (Burt Jones), was involved in the fake elector scheme and is under investigation by Fulton County DA Fani Willis (and no, she won’t ever be on my list of potential judges).
LikeLike
I’m also nervous about Oregon. Worried that Independent Betsy Johnson could throw the election to the GOP.
LikeLike
For all the talk of surprise upsets for Democrats, Oregon most definitely could be a surprise for the Republicans. It’s far too close for comfort.
Arizona is definitely the state that can produce the worst Republicans state wide this November. I’m really disappointed Ducey enforced all of them.
No, Fanny Willis has done a lot of good but far too many better nominees for federal judgeships in Georgia. And all would be confirmed much easier than her as well.
LikeLike
It’s only a worry if the governor in Oregon can decertify elections. The state legislature in Oregon is Dem so they can’t pass voter suppression laws or abortion bans.
LikeLike
Context as to how Fani Willis was elected in 2020. There were three candidates:
-Paul Howard (incumbent since 1997; also the uncle of NBA star Dwight Howard, who put a lot of money towards his campaigns).
-Fani Willis
-Christian Wise Smith (a “progressive prosecutor” in the mold of Larry Krasner, George Gascon, Chesa Boudin etc.) (disclaimer: he is a personal acquaintance of mine).
Paul Howard had a reputation for corruption, as well as for prosecuting anything that got to his desk. During the primary, both Willis and Smith portrayed themselves as more progressive than Howard. The biggest difference was that Smith said he wouldn’t prosecute marijuana laws, while Willis said she still would. It was around this same time (even before the George Floyd incident), that people in the wealthy mostly white Buckhead area of Atlanta, fed up with an uptick in crime, began to form their city hood movement. Many of them lined up behind Willis. No candidate got over 50% in the primary, so the race went to a runoff between Howard and Willis, with Willis beating Howard by 45 points. During the runoff, despite his earlier criticism of Howard, Smith rubbed a lot of people the wrong way by endorsing him, citing his decision to charge the officers who killed Rayshard Brooks, charges that were later dropped. Now Fani Willis is the most well known DA in America.
LikeLike
Very good synopsis Ethan. Those three-way races in states with run offs can rally break in any direction. Pretty stunning when an incumbent loses like Howard did in this case.
LikeLike
There are Libertarian candidates in most of the GA statewide races. Complete chaos if there are multiple runoffs.
LikeLike
From POLITICO this morning, https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/13/mcconnell-schumer-judicial-appointments-midterms-00061487?
LikeLike
I was just reading that as well. We are now tied with Trump at this point in his presidency. Thanks in large part to deals Democrats cut in August & right before the midterms of 2018 to confirm more than a dozen Trump judges in each case. Of course we get no such deal.
(https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/11/senate-democrats-judges-895168)
LikeLike
Many of those were his less controversial picks, right?
LikeLike
The article did say the deal left out Thomas Farr. But still, there are plenty of non controversial nominees pending now. The 3 PR judges & 4 Pennsylvania nominees at least. And at the very least Doris Pryor & Dana Douglas for the circuit courts. I bet Schumer didn’t even offer the deal.
LikeLike
The jury just reached a sentence verdict in the case of Nicholas Cruz, the Parkland School Shooter. Some members of the jury refused to support the death penalty, which means he gets life without parole for killing 17 people. Many of the victims’ survivors are upset with the jury.
LikeLike
They should not have served on the jury if they wouldn’t even consider the death penalty. Suck, I live in Miami & wanted that for his sentence as well.
LikeLike
Couldn’t agree more.
LikeLike
Very true. Oopposing the death penalty where it’s called for and legal is a form of jury nullification.
LikeLike
I wish the senator well. I’m happy he made the right choice to retire at the end of the year. Another thing the article mentions that I didn’t realize is next year we will have a new Senate pro tem. Either Dianne Feinstein or Chuck Grassley.
(https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/13/leahy-hospitalized-00061807)
LikeLike