Mississippi District Attorney Scott Colom has built a name for himself as a “progressive” prosecutor, frequently writing and advocating for changes in the justice system. Colom has now been tapped for a vacancy on the federal bench in Mississippi.
A native of Columbus, Mississippi, Colom was born on December 25, 1983. He graduated from Millsaps College in 2005 and from the University of Wisconsin Law School in 2009. He subsequently spent two years as a staff lawyer for the Mississippi Center for Justice before joining Colom & Colom in private practice.
While maintaining his private practice, Colom also served as a city and municipal court judge as well as a part-time prosecutor in Columbus.
In 2015, Colom defeated 30-year-incumbent Forrest Allgood in a contentious race for district attorney for the 16th Judicial District of Mississippi, where Colom currently serves.
History of the Seat
Colom has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi. This seat opened on November 1, 2021, when Judge Michael Mills took senior status. Colom was recommended to the White House in November 2021 by U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, the sole Democrat in Mississippi’s Congressional delegation.
Colom started his legal career at the Mississippi Center for Justice, a nonprofit law firm focused on racial justice issues and then spent five years in private practice. Among the most notable cases he handled with the firm, Colom represented Taylor Bell, an Itawamba Agricultural School student who was disciplined by the school for publishing a rap song on Facebook that contained vulgar lyrics and criticized two coaches at the school. See Miss. Student Challenges Suspension Over Rap Song, A.P. State & Local Wire, Dec. 4, 2012. The district court dismissed Bell’s challenge, finding that the song was not protected under the First Amendment. See Bell v. Itawamba Cnty. Sch. Bd., 859 F. Supp. 2d 834 (N.D. Miss. 2012). However, a divided panel of the Fifth Circuit reversed the dismissal, finding that the disciplining of a student for purely off-campus activities violates the First Amendment. See Bell v. Itawamba Cnty. Sch. Bd., 774 F.3d 280 (5th Cir. 2014). The full Fifth Circuit took the matter en banc and affirmed the district court’s decision. See Bell v. Itawamba Cnty. Sch. Bd., 799 F.3d 379 (5th Cir. 2015) (en banc).
Since 2016, Colom has served as district attorney for the 16th Judicial District in Mississippi, which covers four counties in Northeastern Mississippi. His campaign against longtime incumbent Forrest Allgood involved criticism of the incumbent’s “tough on crime” record and the number of overturned convictions under his watch. See Leon Neyfakh, How to Run Against a Tough-on-Crime DA – And Win, Slate, Nov. 12, 2015.
Notably, as D.A., Colom was asked to review criminal charges related to the shooting death of Ricky Ball from police officer Canyon Boykin. Colom controversially decided to hand the case to the Attorney General’s office for prosecution, stating that his office handling the case would have an appearance of bias given their close relationship with the police department. See Jeff Amy, District Attorney Hands Police Shooting Prosecution to State, A.P. State & Local, July 6, 2016. However, after Democratic Attorney General Jim Hood was replaced by Republican Lynn Fitch in the 2019 elections, Fitch dropped the charges against Boykin, prompting criticism by Colom, who claimed that he was not consulted in the decision. See DA: Bad Time to Drop Charge of Ex-Cop in Black Man’s Death, A.P. Int’l, May 29, 2020.
In other matters, Colom supported the release of Steven Jessie Harris, who had been held for 11 years without trial, to a state mental health facility. Emily Wagster Pettus, Man Held 11 Years Without Trial Will Go to Mental Facility, A.P. State & Local, June 14, 2016. He also dropped murder charges against Brittania Smith, noting that toxicology reports did not support that she had fatally poisoned her child. See Murder Charge Dropped Against West Point Woman, A.P. State & Local, July 11, 2016. Colom also dropped murder charges against Eddie Lee Howard, who spent 23 years on death row, after his conviction was based on debunked bite mark evidence. See Leah Willingham, Murder Charge Dismissed After Debunked Bite-Mark Testimony, A.P. Int’l, Jan. 11, 2021.
Statements and Writings
As a district attorney, Colom has frequently issued statements regarding prosecutions of his office. He has also issued statements on other issues as well. For example, in 2021, Colom was one of the politicians who was discovered to have unpaid campaign finance fines (in his case $50). See Taylor Vance, Mississippi Elected Officials, Candidates Owe Thousands in Unpaid Campaign Finance Fines, Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, July 1, 2021. In the article, Colom blamed the failure to pay on a lack of notice from the Secretary of State’s office, noting that a predecessor had sent out email notifications. See id. (quoting Scott Colom).
Specifically, Colom has been vocal about the use of special prosecutors to prosecute cases of police misconduct, arguing that keeping the cases with the elected prosecutors’ offices creates an appearance of bias. See Why one North Mississippi D.A. Thinks Special Prosecutors Hold the Key in Police Shootings, Mississippi Today, Aug. 20, 2018.
In addition, Colom has frequently joined amicus briefs and letters with other prosecutors. For example, Colom signed onto an amicus brief with the Fifth Circuit opposing cash bail for misdemeanor defendants. See Attorney General Racine, Other Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Leaders Call for End to Cash Bail for Misdemeanor Defendants, States News Service, Aug. 10, 2017. Colom also signed onto a Supreme Court brief seeking to overturn a 241 year sentence imposed by Missouri on a juvenile. See 75 Judges, Prosecutors, Probation, Corrections, Law Enforcement Leaders Call on Supreme Court to Reject 241-Year Sentence for Juvenile, Targeted News Service, Mar. 15, 2018. Colom also joined an amicus brief seeking the overturning of a Missouri conviction after new evidence was unearthed. See Elected Prosecutors File State Supreme Court Brief in Support of New Trial for Innocent Man Behind Bars, States News Service, Feb. 11, 2020. He also wrote in support of reducing prison populations in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. See Scott Colom and Miriam Aroni Krinsky, Tragedy of COVID-19 in Prison Shows Need for Decarceration, The People’s Vanguard of Davis, July 3, 2020. See also Elected Prosecutors Call for Dramatic Reduction in Incarcerated and Detained Populations in Response to Coronavirus, The People’s Vanguard of Davis, Mar. 18, 2020.
Given Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Durbin’s commitment to preserve home-state veto power over district court nominees, Colom makes for a curious choice from the Biden Administration for Mississippi. His record overall is strongly liberal and willing to court controversy. Additionally, at only 38, Colom is young enough to have a lengthy tenure on the court. One would think that these would be reasons for Mississippi’s home state senators to block his nomination.
However, the fact that Colom’s nomination has become public suggests that the senators have, at least tentatively, signed off on him. For all of the Administration’s judicial assertiveness, they have largely resisted the urge to override home-state senators on nominations, even in states where they could have arguably done so. As such, it will be interesting to see if Colom’s nomination represents part of a deal with Mississippi senators (perhaps as part of the state’s U.S. Attorney picks), or if Colom was able to strongly impress the senators in meeting with them. As Colom is also a good friend of Mississippi Republican Representative Trent Kelly, it is possible that Colom has fans on the other side of the aisle.
For someone who claims to be from NY, you sure know and are making a lot of predictions about the 5th Circuit vacancy in Texas. I’m beginning to think you’re an insider on that one Buddy!
Well actually I was born in New York but have lived in Florida for over two decades… Lol
And nope, no inside information. Just my personal predictions. I will say I have correctly guessed the last three SCOTUS picks so I have a decent track record on predictions. But we shall see the next two years Hoe that record holds up… Lol
A quick aside, not sure if this has been mentioned previously, apologize if its a repeat, but there is a big state Supreme Court race in April 2023 in Wisconsin that will determine control of that court..
LikeLiked by 1 person
It looks like despite how bad we did on a federal level, New York Democrats will keep their supermajority in the Senate.
Hopefully they will be smarter with her picks this time around and not pick any more closet Republicans.
I know we have talked a lot about how many judges, particularly circuit court nominees will be confirmed. If Schumer is only going to confirm a few this year, here’s the three I would prioritize & why.
1. Nancy Abudu – I agree with @Shawn that she should be discharged & confirmed before the Georgia runoff.
2. Maria Araújo Kahn – Although I wish Biden had picked any number of other younger possibilities, we need to get José A. Cabranes off the bench as soon as possible.
3. Cindy K. Chung – I like to see when multiple judges are nominated to the same court, the senate confirm them in order of age. That maximizes the number of possible chief judges in the future. So I would like to see Chung confirmed before Montgomery.
I would also prioritize Bradley Garcia as well. The DC Circuit is very important and may be especially so if the House GOP starts all sorts of sham investigations next year.
Very good point. If the number was three, I would probably put Garcia ahead of Chung. I forgot despite Montgomery being nominated first, next year when all of the names are submitted at once, the order should reset in alphabetical order. Chung’s “C” should come far enough before Montgomery’s “M” to make sure she receives her commission first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with your list Dequan, especially the last two as those will be flips, which will make the 2nd Circuit a liberal/moderate majority court and the 3rd split right down the middle(it’s gone back and forth quite a bit.)
We have had one new nominee in the past 80 days & counting. This rivals the SCOTUS near shutdown when we just had Stephanie D. Davis as the only new nominee over an 84-day span between January 19th & April 13th.
I guess a SCOTUS vacancy is now on the same level as a midterm election to halt new nominees. Hopefully we can get a new batch in the next 4 days, or this will surpass the SCOTUS stoppage as the worst drought for new nominees.
Not surprising, given that Biden putting in more nominees then wasn’t needed (there wouldn’t have been time for the senate to process them if the senate did flip, and now the senate has a lot of time to process potential nominees). Hoping for a lot of new nominees early 2023.
If I had to guess I’d say we won’t get any more nominees until mid December. That way they can sit for the minimum 28 days before a hearing in Mid January. Also at that point we’ll know the final makeup of the senate as well, so perhaps Dems will be more aggressive if it’s 51/49 vs 50/50.
I’m hoping we get 2 circuit nominees in that batch so that Schumer and Durbin can go ahead and work on filling the last of the vacancies.
We won’t be seeing more nominees until the runoff is completed.
That would crush the 84 days we waited during the SCOTUS vacancy. Harsh Voruganti will have to get a new hobby at this rate… Lol
Haha good point. Is the site officially out of nominees to write up? Are we just going to keep talking on Coloms article for another month?
Nope, no more nominees left. Scott Colom will break the Vetting Room record for most comments. Well I may have to look back at J Childs. We were all literally waiting by our computers for her bio to come out & it was on… Lol
We have a SJC nomination hearing next week officially. We should see Jabari Wamble & 5 district courts.
I would also expect next week for the nominees who were held over last week to finally get votes to send them to the floor.
Julie Rikelman is the one I expect will need a discharge vote, something that would be moot if Warnock wins in two weeks.
I think Rinkleman will be the only tie vote. Perhaps Graham knows with 2 more years in the majority, there is nothing he can do to stop her from getting confirmed & vote for her but likely a tie for her. All others should get at least one Republican vote.
Any guesses on next weeks business meeting? I’m guessing everyone except Rikelman will get voted out, but I missed the virtual hearing in October (along with most of the GOP members) so I’m not sure how some of those district nominees might play out.
There really wasn’t an issue with any of them.
Johnstone may a problem if Daines doesn’t return his blue slip but beyond that, I don’t forsee any nominees having issues with being sent to the floor.
That’s not how blue slips work. Blue slips come into play BEFORE the hearing.
Unfortunately Graham likes to pretend they still exist for circuit court nominees, so if he feels Daines wasn’t properly consulted and supportive of the nominee then he’ll vote no.
We will have a hearing next Wed.
No nominees yet, but I heard Dequan will be one of the nominees for the Eighth Circuit, LOL..
Actually, there is a better chance that Dequan or myself will be nominated to the 8th Circuit & the non existent 13th Circuit, before Schumer keeps the senate in on a Fri or Sat .. lol
There’s a better chance of a vacancy on the 8th circuit, Congress to create a 13th circuit, you & I be the nominees for two of the seats & Hershal Walker actually living in Georgia & not Texas, then Schumer working on a Friday… Lmao
I agree !!
Next Thurs SJC Business meeting should be productive….11 nominees should clear, as Rikelman will almost certainly be an 11-11 vote…
I just hope Durbin doesn’t hold any nominees over for a 2nd time, sometimes GOP tries to hold some nominees over ANOTHER week…
Durbin has been pretty good about not holding nominees over for a second week. The main problem is when a nominee has a hearing on a Wednesday & the next week Thursday, he doesn’t put them on the executive calendar to be held over 8 days later. Then they are put on the following Thursday 15 days after their hearing & held over then.
I know others have said the senators have a week to send in written questions & it takes the nominee more than 24 hours to answer them. But if they are being held over anyway, why not put them on the schedule 8 days later. I think a good solution for this could be what we saw last week. Change the day for the SJC hearing to Tuesday’s. That way the senators can have their questions in by the next week Tuesday. That gives the nominees 48 hours to answer the questions & can be held over 9 days later on the next week Thursday.
Pingback: The Unexpected Opportunity – Assessing the Landscape of Judicial Vacancies | The Vetting Room