As the first half of President Biden’s term draws to a close, his team can count judicial nominations (and confirmations) as an area of success as his Administration has outpaced other recent Administrations in both nominations and confirmations (all numbers are drawn from the Federal Judicial Center). Biden also remains poised for a significant impact on the federal bench in the second half of his term.
Nominations
In the first year of his presidency, Biden submitted 73 nominees to Article III courts, more than any other modern president. By the end of this year, Biden has submitted an additional 75 nominees, for a total of 148. This is slightly below the 158 nominations that Trump announced in his first Congress, but, given the significantly larger number of vacancies that Trump inherited, compared to Biden, the fact that the gap is so close is nonetheless impressive.
Of these 148 nominations, 1 has been to the Supreme Court, 37 to the court of appeals, and 110 to the district courts.
Confirmations
In 2021, the Senate confirmed 40 Article III judges: 11 judges to the U.S. Court of Appeals; and 29 judges to the U.S. District Court. The Senate subsequently confirmed 57 in 2022: 1 to the Supreme Court; 17 to the Court of Appeals; and 39 to the District Courts.
Furthermore, Biden saw confirmation of 65% of judicial nominees submitted in his first Congress. This is significantly higher than the 53% that Trump saw.
Withdrawals
Furthermore, President Biden has still not seen a single judicial nominee defeated in an up-or-down vote. While Democrats did lose a confirmation vote on Third Circuit nominee Arianna Freeman, this was due to absences, and Democrats were able to confirm her on a motion to reconsider.
However, Biden is likely to have to withdraw two judicial nominations at the end of this Congress. Eastern District of Wisconsin nominee William Pocan has been blue-slipped by GOP Senator Ron Johnson, despite Johnson having previously signed off on him. With Johnson narrowly re-elected and Democrats not changing the district court blue slip policy so far, it is unlikely that Pocan has a path to confirmation and the White House will likely look for a new nominee.
Northern District of New York nominee Jorge Rodriguez faces a different issue. The judge he was nominated to replace, Judge David Hurd, has declined to take senior status, expressing opposition to Rodriguez not being a Utica-based practitioner. Barring another vacancy opening up on the court that Rodriguez might be nominated for (Judges Glenn Suddaby and Mae D’Agostino would both be eligible for senior status next Congress if they chose to take it), it is expected that he will not be renominated.
Diversity
The Biden Administration has prioritized choosing women and racial/ethnic minorities for court seats, seeking to do so to offset the lack of diversity in the nominees of previous administrations. They have also sought out nominees from backgrounds that are traditionally less likely to become judges, including public defenders, and civil rights attorneys. Both focuses are reflected in the nominees put forward.
So far, Biden has nominated one woman to the Supreme Court, twenty-seven women to the court of appeals, and seventy women on the district level, making 66% of his judicial nominations women. Biden’s confirmations has surged the number of women on the U.S. Court of Appeals from 59 to 64, moving the court of appeals from 33.3% female to 36.6% female.
Overall Assessment
Perhaps the greatest praise that can be given to the Biden Administration on judicial nominations is they have done more with less than any other recent administration. President Biden had the narrowest of Senate majorities, dependent entirely on the presence of the Vice President, and had inherited a comparatively small number of judicial vacancies. Nonetheless, he was able to outpace President Trump and President Obama through a combination of strategy, persistence, and luck. Biden also owes a significant debt to the Senate Democratic caucus, who held together on every single nomination vote, allowing a number of controversial nominees to be confirmed despite strong Republican opposition; and to Sen. Lindsey Graham, who backed most of the President’s judges, allowing them to bypass time-consuming discharge votes. Additionally, on multiple occasions, Graham allowed Biden appointees to be voted out of Committee and avoid discharge even where he ended up opposing the nominee in the end. As a result, of the 97 judges confirmed under Biden, 90 received some Republican support for confirmation, meaning that just 7% of Biden confirmations were on party-line votes. In comparison, 9% of Trump appointees in his first Congress drew no Democratic support. With the Democratic majority now rising to 51, senators wishing to demonstrate some independence will presumably have more wiggle room to do so without jeopardizing confirmation. As such, one may expect to see some Democrats oppose Biden nominees, but it is unlikely that any would do so in a manner that is likely to defeat them. As such, with 113 vacancies still open to fill, Biden has the capacity to match, if not exceed, the 234 judicial confirmations that Trump saw.
The Vetting Room 
Harsh’s final post of the year. Thank you for all of your hard work & this great blog. 2023 should be an outstanding year for the judiciary. Happy new year all
LikeLike
Yay. New post.
With 808 comments (a record?) on the previous post, let’s hope we won’t have to wait that long, talking about the same exact things again. This is meant for Biden, only he can nominate new people.
LikeLike
Haaaaa… I think 808 comments is definitely a new record. Had Harsh known, he could have spaced out the post for the nominees from the August & September… Lol
But between this post & the five new nominees from last week, with hopefully a fresh new batch sometime in January or early February, the 808 comments record should be safe for quite some time.
LikeLike
Clinton district court appointees from states with two Democrat Senators who have yet to take senior status (I did not include David Hurd or SDNY Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain, who is not eligible for senior status until November 2023):
-David O. Carter (Central District of California; born 1944)
-Colleen Kollar-Kotelly (District Court for the District of Columbia; born 1943)
-Rebecca Pallmeyer (Northern District of Illinois; born 1954)
-Patti Saris (District of Massachusetts; born 1951)
-Richard Stearns (District of Massachusetts; born 1944)
-Paul Borman (District of Michigan; born 1939)
-John Tunheim (District of Minnesota; born 1953)
-John Koeltl (Southern District of New York; born 1945)
-Ann Aiken (District of Oregon; born 1951)
-Leonie Brinkema (Eastern District of Virginia; born 1944)
LikeLike
At the end of the day, the ability for Biden to pass Trump’s 230 (I know Harsh & most articles puts the number at 234 but that’s if you count Amy Coney Barrett & three other judges twice) judges will hinge on how many district court vacancies he can fill in red & purple states. And that will depend on Durin’s decision on blue slips. And if he decides to alter blue slips, it will depend on how early he makes that decision.
LikeLike
Even though Biden hasn’t had as many flips as Trump has yet, we still have had some on the 1st,2nd, 3rd,7th with a couple of more to come.
And in some cases, yes a Democratic appointee is replacing another but Sandra Lynch and Jose Cabranes (who may as well as be a Republican nominee) are far more conservative then the people who will be replacing them are on many issues, especially criminal justice.
If nothing else, I view it this way.
We can’t undo all the damage of the Trump years when it comes to the court but every seat that has been filled under Biden is one less seat conservatives get to fill down the line with a firebreather that wants to undo the entire 20th century and that we’ll have two more years of that.
LikeLike
Happy New Year to everyone. Enjoy the discussions and looking forward to a bunch of confirmations in 2023.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just saw this posted.
Sandra Lynch decided not to wait for Julie Rikelman to be confirmed and has officially taken senior status which means the 1st Circuit will have two vacancies for at least a couple of months.
Rikelman will be confirmed but it will create a minor crunch at the 1st in the meantime, albeit a small one given there are still a number of senior status judges who hear cases on a full time basis and also due to the fact Rikelman will be confirmed by the end of the month or in February.
LikeLike
Is there any historical similarities to the senate taking three weeks off in any previous January? I only remember them taking time off for MLK day but I still don’t understand why they are taking off three weeks. Has anybody seen an explanation?
It sure can’t be because they are over worked. They took off last August, two weeks in October & a week for Thanksgiving. It’s truly infuriating that these nominees will have to wait until February to be confirmed solely because the senators are lazy. Even if they just worked Tuesday. Wednesday & Thursday they could have confirmed almost all of the pending circuit court nominees before February.
LikeLike
2021 had a similar schedule but that was likely due to not knowing who would control the Senate until January.
Not sure why they’re doing this, though prior years did have the Senate taking a week off for MLK’s birthday.
One thing’s for sure, Dale Ho among others better be confirmed ASAP by end of January/early February, they’ve waited long enough.
LikeLike
It would be nice if Durbin had an executive meeting to at least get these nominees voted back to the floor after Biden resubmits their names on Tuesday. If not, I’m not sure what the senate will do the first week & a half when they return. The SJC executive meetings are always on Thursday (Except for the KBJ vote) so that means the senate won’t have any nominees to vote on the first week they return without a recess meeting.
Then the earliest Schumer can send a cloture motion for any of them will be the Monday of week two (Unless he keeps the senate in session late Thursday or Friday in week one which we know he won’t). If it takes two days for a cloture motion to mature, the earliest we will see a vote is week two Wednesday.
LikeLike
I agree Dequan, Durbin needs to have an executive meeting to at least get these nominees onto the floor.
On a different note, don’t know Hochul doesn’t get that Lasalle’s nomination is DOA at this point, as centrist Democrats have come out against his nomination at this point and the NY Senate Judiciary chair has made it clear he won’t allow a floor vote if the majority of Democrats are opposed.
As I’ve said before, yes progressive groups/labor unions are opposed to him but more then anything else, most NY Democrats are still ticked off at what the Cuomo hacks did in regards to redestricting and why anyone viewed as remotely connected to him or Janet Difoire isn’t going to see a confirmation vote.
In the same breath, folks need to be prepared for the fact that Lasalle failing doesn’t mean a liberal name will be picked, likely a centrist, which would still be better then the conservative wing we have now.
LikeLike
At this point I’m not sure Hochul gets anything. She is a clear disappointment in a deep blue state & is only in office today because her predecessor was a sexual predator & her opponent in November was a right wing lunatic. Put her in most of the 49 other states & she probably loses her race in November. She’s that bad of a nominee & an even worse governor.
The NY Democrat party is a disaster right now. From not doing the most basic Wikipedia opposition research on George Santos in either of his two races in the past two years, to giving the highest court in the state a conservative majority to losing 5 House seats. Hell, even the mayor of Buffalo can’t seem to handle a snowstorm. If the Republicans would start running even halfway decent candidates, they would have a chance at knocking off some of these piss poor New York Democrats. I’d actually be ok with the senate taking January off if Schumer would step in & get the New York State party in check.
LikeLike
Lots of layers to what happened in NY but besides the redestricting garbage which helped Republicans, and Hochul taking her race for granted, two other factors came into play.
One the media had their narratives on crime/inflation etc. and thus didn’t care about the information that was brought to their attention about Santos.
Second, the bail reform law was long overdue but the fact it’s backers couldn’t forsee the attacks that would come on it and letting Republicans set the narrative on it was political malpractice.
From that standpoint, I get the anger Hochul and others have over it and while she felt the need to go with Lasalle even though she shouldn’t have so she would appear to be tough on crime to some degree.
It’s why when he fails I’m still certain Corey Stoughton won’t be the nominee, not with background.
As long as it’s not Lasalle though, I think folks should be happy with most of the other names that could be brought forward.
LikeLike
It stinks, but I don’t think anyone is going to get voted out of committee until Thursday, February 2. My guess is until then the senate will probably only voted on less high profile administration posts.
LikeLike
In an even SJC I would assume the Republicans could force the one week hold over bs if the first SJC meeting was on January 26th. That would mean the following week they would be fired to the floor on February 2nd. But I hope with a 1 seat advantage the Democrats would be able to vote the nominees straight to the floor in the first executive meeting. At least those that have already appeared on the calendar once already. But of course all that could be avoided if Durbin would just have one SJC meeting in one of the recess weeks even just to hold everybody over. But I guess that’s asking too much.
LikeLike
Possibly so Dequan, that would be nice to see. At the very least do it for the ones who had already been voted out of committee during the 117th Congress. But we will see.
LikeLike
With the extra seat, I don’t know if they’ll do the extra holdover week, as there’s no need to appease Republicans anymore.
I do also expect to see more no votes from Manchin and Sinema now that they aren’t going to be the deciding votes a la what Susan Collins did under Trump and George W.
LikeLike
Since we have three weeks on our hands, last night I thought of a major hypothetical & wanted to see what everybody thought had it happened.
What if instead of Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor would have retired last year. Does anybody here think Biden would have broken his pleaded to name a Black woman or do you all think he would have kept his pledge, leaving the SCOTUS without a Hispanic justice. I keep going back & fourth on my opinion but think he might have kept his pledge but immediately had pledged to make a Hispanic upon the next vacancy.
I think that more so not because it’s what I would have done or what I think would have been the best decision, but more so because with the lack of Hispanic circuit court nominees By Biden, I don’t think the bench would have been deep enough to justify him breaking his pledge. Brad Garcia hadn’t been named yet when Breyer retired so the only viable choices would have been Gelpi who is left of center & born in 1965 & Myrna Perez who would have been a solid pick.
LikeLike
I think in that scenario it would have been Myrna Perez running away.
If she chooses to retire in the next two years, I think it will come down to her or Brad Garcia.
LikeLike
I totally agree with your second point. As to your first point, that’s what I would have done & announced that I’m still committed to naming a Black woman in the next vacancy. I’m just not too sure that’s what Biden would have done. It would be interesting to ask him that off the record.
LikeLike
As much as I am all for putting very young justices on the bench, Brad Garcia still seems too young and inexperienced for SCOTUS. If there’s a vacancy in 2023-2024 I’d prefer Perez.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brad Garcia has more court room experience as a litigant today than when both Clarence Thomas & Amy Coney Barett had as both a litigant & jurist when each was nominated to SCOTUS. He would be a fantastic choice in my book although I would have no problem with Myrna Perez either. But we shouldn’t confuse youth with inexperience. Garcia has a wealth of experience even without being a judge.
And yes, I agree Mario Garcia is probably the best choice for the 7th circuit for Indiana. He is a great compromise nominee at 49 years old with a progressive background. And of course, with the lack of Hispanic circuit court judges, he would be the first for the 7th. Although I would be more than happy for a vacancy on the 7th from Illinois to open up & that seat go to Nico Martinez. He would be the equivalent to Brad Garcia.
LikeLike
https://www.wrtv.com/news/hispanic-heritage/hoosier-making-history-as-first-hispanic-federal-magistrate-judge-in-southern-district-of-indiana
On a different note when looking towards nominees for Circuit Courts, I still have Mario Garcia as the most likely candidate to replace Michael Kanne, as he has a solid history of defending indigent clients and has worked in reentry programs, something Biden and company like and he would be the first Hispanic on the 7th Circuit.
He is more liberal then Pryor is but not as much as Perez or Sung is.
Also, he’s only 49 so while not quite as young as some of the other Biden nominees we’ve seen, he’s well within the acceptable range IMO (if he was in his mid 50’s or beyond, different story.) to be nominated.
LikeLike
It looks like circuit court judge roopali desai swearing in katie hobbs as arizona governor.
LikeLike
Who would have thought someone amazing like Roopali Desai would happen at Sinema’s request?
LikeLike
It is all about relationships.
LikeLike
Agreed – I read some article a while back about how Desai and Sinema go way back (I think Desai has been Sinema’s campaign attorney since her first run for Congress) and are pretty close. I do not believe Desai has written any published opinions or been on any panels (with the exception on an en banc panel recently), so I’m hoping her jurisprudence reflects her past experiences more than any ideological similarities with Sinema.
For all of Sinema’s many faults, she did a pretty good job whipping votes for Desai and got her confirmed in record time and with (I think) the most votes of any of Biden’s court of appeals nominees. To be fair, the context was that the Republicans were trying to get Sinema to kill the IRA (or at least maintain the carried interest loophole, which she did). I know that not every Democratic senator necessarily has that leverage, but I still would’ve loved to see Warren, Brown, or Ossoff/Warnock do as much to push their states’ appellate nominees as Sinema did.
Desai should also definitely be in the conversation for first Asian American SCOTUS justice if there are any vacancies between now and 2024 (especially if Alito leaves the bench, but I wouldn’t rule out the first Asian justice if Thomas or Sotomayor leave either). Sinema formally becoming an independent may have hurt her chances, but the fact that she got such a bipartisan confirmation means she’ll be closely looked at. She’d definitely be better than Srinivasan (the most likely pick given Biden’s centrist leanings) or Koh/Pan (both of whom are older and have a less progressive background). The only judge I’d prefer over Desai is Sung because of her background as a labor lawyer, but the administration probably thinks that Desai would be more easily confirmed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suspect if Biden got another non Sotomayor vacancy, he would highly consider the first AAPI justice. All of the names @Hank mentioned plus John Lee would probably be the front runners. And just as @Hank said, the only one I would want to see nominated would be Desai or Sung.
LikeLike
Ah yes forgot about Lee – he would definitely be in contention as well for the first Asian judge. My gut says that if Biden gets a vacancy because of Alito/Thomas, he would nominate another woman so women make up a majority of the court (and with Alito/Thomas replaced by a liberal, SCOTUS would be less extreme).
None of this is likely to happen of course, but it’s an interesting contrast with the Republicans – I don’t pay as much attention to whatever craziness is going on inside of Fed Soc, but I haven’t heard of much chatter on the right about putting another conservative woman on SCOTUS after Barrett. If a Republican wins in 2024, I wonder if McConnell will still push for his lackey Amul Thapar (or if 56 will be too old for Fed Soc).
LikeLike
@Hank
In the unfortunate chance of a Republican president & senate in 2025 followed by a SCOTUS vacancy, I think Amul Thapar would be too old by then. I think the nominee would likely be either James Ho or Justin Walker. Scary thought
LikeLike
I would still like Dale Ho myself but I realize that is unlikely to happen.
LikeLike
Scary thing is of the names you mentioned, Thapar would be the least worst among them.
LikeLike
I think Neomi Rao would also be a GOP possibility. My bet as things stand today would be her or Ho.
I really really hope we don’t see either happen.
LikeLike
@Joe and @Dequan
If Republicans win the White House and Clarence Thomas retires, than Neomi Reo and Kannon Shanmugan are real possibilities.
If Samuel Alito retires under a Republican President, one name to watch is Greg Katsas, who’s made a good impression on many. However, his age could be a problem.
I’d be very surprised if Justin Walker got nominated. People talk about how nice and pleasant he is, but he’s not considered a legal heavyweight.
LikeLike
Unless first nominated to an appeals court, it would be hard to imagine a SCOTUS nominee not being a sitting federal or state SCOTUS judge. I know Kannon Shanmugan could he nominated to a federal judgeship prior however depending on the timing of a SCOTUS vacancy.
I thought of Greg Katsas but didn’t mention him since senator Kennedy voted against him. Of course he probably would vote for any SCOTUS nominee but I think that may give a Republican president some pause depending on how many GOP senators there are.
I too don’t believe Justin Walker is a legal heavyweight. But he is Mitch’s handpicked guy & is the youngest (Until Brad Garcia is confirmed) judge on the second highest court in the land. I think he will get serious consideration but to your point probably along with Neomi Reo on the same court.
LikeLike
@Dequan,
You make some interesting points. But Mitch McConnell has seen his influence reduced. Conservatives are upset with him for “wasting” money supporting Lisa Murkowski when she didn’t face a serious Democrat. He’s on the outs with Trump and, by extension, Trump’s core supporters.
Elena Kagan had no judicial experience when she was chosen over Diane Wood in 2010. That’s one reason why Kannon Shanmugan came to mind for me. Also the fact that he’s a well-regarded appellate lawyer. He doesn’t have an extensive paper trail like James Ho, who could also get chosen.
In spite of the Vox article, I don’t see Kagan retiring. I don’t rule out a Sotomayor retirement, but think it’s unlikely.
LikeLike
I actually should have included the sitting US Solicitor General (Who is nicknamed the 10th justice because they argue so frequently in front of the SCOTUS) in my comment about only sitting federal judges would probably be considered.
But yes you are correct that Mitch’s power has diminished over the last couple of years. My statement was based more on where I think Mitch’s power will be in a potential 2025 year. I believe he will be in a stronger position in 2025 because I think Trump will be weaker by then. I just can’t see the Republicans continuing to lose elections they should win (Although I hope they do personally). If that is the case, I think Justin Walker’s stick would rise under that scenario.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s good to see the senate back in session & leader Schumer talking & back in action, despite what I think about them taking three weeks off. I hope they return on fire & get off to a speedy start of confirming more judges.
LikeLike
It looks like we won’t be seeing confirmations until February at the earliest.
Hopefully we will see more nominees before then though, especially for the circuit courts.
LikeLike
We saw a batch of nominees on January 19th last year. I’d expect another batch around that time of the month this year.
LikeLike
Assuming the first SJC meeting is January 25th, that means the next would be February 8. If Biden wants any additional nominees to be at that hearing, he would probably try to nominate them by January 11 in keeping with the 28 day tradition. All of that is suspect to change, however.
I’m really interested to finally see Wamble and also Colon in front of the committee, so I hope those two at least make the first hearing.
LikeLike
I wonder what the holdup with Wamble has been.
Something pop up in a background check Biden/Klain/Durbin didn’t like?
LikeLike
@Zach Jones
Good question. Wamble doesn’t seem to be a bomb thrower and his resume looks conventional. Maybe the Senators are trying to make him part of a package with vacant the District Court seat and the negotiations have hit a snag.
LikeLike
Could be that too.
I don’t think it’s because one of the senators won’t return a blue slip.
Arianna Freeman and Andre Mathis made clear that isn’t an issue for circuit court seats anymore.
LikeLike
Renominations sent to Senate. I don’t see Wamble…
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/01/03/nominations-sent-to-the-senate-91/
LikeLike
Biden will probably send a second renomination slate later. There are many missing from this one in addition to Wamble. I also don’t see Colleen Lawless who is from Durbin’s home state. Kymberly Evanson, Robert S. Ballou, Myong J. Joun, both of California Central & all three Southern district nominees are also missing. No way he’s not renominating that many.
LikeLike
Ah I see. That’s good to know. Too much paperwork to do them all at once I suppose. Hopefully it won’t delay a hearing, whenever that occurs.
LikeLike
On a different note, I know we gripe about judges but the clown show going on right now in the House makes it clear Democrats did the right thing in making sure last minute legislation etc. got passed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Definitely getting legislation done before the end of last year was smart. I must say I’m thrilled to see the House GOP deny McCarthy the speakership. As I’ve said before I would rather John Eastman be the Speaker over McCarthy. Kevin is spineless & has absolutely no integrity. Eastman doesn’t either but at least he doesn’t pretend to have any.
When I heard Matt Gatez told him he would rather see Hakim Jeffries as Speaker than Kevin, that one sentence showed more integrity than I’ve ever seen come out of McCarthy’s mouth. If he is denied the speakership, it may have been worth the Democrats losing a slim majority. All of his ass kissing & trips to Mar-a-largo after an insurrection still not resulting in him becoming Speaker will be one of the highlights of 2023 for me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Getting the Omnibus Bill with all its excellent riders – Electoral Count reform, Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, antitrust reform, etc – plus the Respect for Marriage Act, was indisputably a better use of time. We have two more years to confirm judges now, let’s not get too hung up about having to wait until February for more to be confirmed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wamble not being immediately renominated is weird. I thought people were leaping to conclusions a bit when they were assuming that something had come up in his background checks, but that looks more plausible now. On the other hand, a second set of names might come out tomorrow and render this speculation out-of-date.
My highly uninformed take on potential SCOTUS nominees is:
– If Sotomayor, goes I think her replacement will be Myrna Perez, as I agree Garcia is a bit young, and nominating someone from the same Circuit as Sotomayor has a certain ‘rhyme’ to it. Also wouldn’t be surprised to see Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar being nominated.
– Otherwise I think Elizabeth Prelogar has to be on the list. If Clarence Thomas departed, I think Paul Watford would be the logical replacement.
– Potential wild card: Richard Bernstein of the Michigan Supreme Court. Reliably liberal, first-rate intellectual abilities and has a pretty inspiring life story to round things off.
(It’s nice to be back posting on here; I was seriously ill for much of the second half of 2022 and I’m glad to have recovered enough to resume regular life again. Here’s to two years of good nominees getting confirmed!)
LikeLike
@livesofthelaw
Welcome back. So happy to hear you are doing better. Happy new year & yes, two more years starts today.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Dequan, that’s very kind of you. Can’t drink anything stronger than sparkling apple juice currently, but I’ll toast with that!
LikeLike
@ livesofthelaw
Glad you’re feeling better. Being sick is no fun, was ill about a year ago, it set me back for a couple of weeks.
LikeLike
Should be noted that unless Democrats grant a request for it, there will be no need for hearings for nominees who have already have one.
Also, it looks like Biden will be renominating everyone else in short order so sans Pocan and Rodriguez, we should see all the nominees we saw before.
LikeLike
Interesting read: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-biden-could-appoint-more-judges-than-trump/
LikeLike
Guys lets not play naive and call it as we truly see it, i have been suspecting wamble nomination was in trouble for several weeks now , especially after he wasn’t put up for a hearing, simply due to biden cowardice and weakness in being overly subservient and deferring to kansas. Thats the issue, the right wing senators shenanigans and stalling tactics, dont forget roger marshall the junior senator is a vile lunatic and extremist who voted to throw away votes of states biden won, the idea that biden thinks he can work in good faith with people like this who only care about stalling and buying time is infuriating.
I am going to make a prediction there will be no nomination or replacement for kanne open seat in the 7th circuit this year because biden will foolishly try to work in good faith with indiana senators who gave him an easy and non consequential win allowing him to nominate judge pryor. The vacancy will be open for a year like the kansas seat. Simply due to biden cowardice and fealty to old school bipartisan nonsense.
In a sane world with a strong willed administration, the 5th circuit open vacancy would have been longed filled or at the very least have a nominee instead biden will work in good faith with a vile cretin like ted cruz who will never acquiesce to anyone not a right wing federalist society hack as a judge and basically stall biden nominee for a whole year if not the entire congress.
For God sake shove the patrick bumatays and kenneth lee of our own down their throats! Its genuinely sickening at this point to think that biden and his administration cant see through the bad faith bs efforts by republican senators who only want to stall his nominees and delay.
Is anyone willing to bet against my claim that kanne seat and costa seat will remain vacant this senate year? Simply due to biden cowardice and fear of shoving down his own circuit nominees without care for their views as GOP did under trump.
This wamble stuff is truly infuriating one of the few black circuit court nominees that are men and GOP senators are playing this games and biden cant see through it.
You have a better chance of a snowball in a microwave than tedcruz working in good faith for find a nominee that biden foolishly believes he will.
Guys imagine this opposite scenario, if this was a trump admin under mcconell does anyone have single doubt there would not have been a nomination at the very least to kanne and the 5th circuit vacancy by last year? That just shows you how seriously they take judges and democrats do not. It took justin walker less than 3 months to get confirmed and nancy abudu couldn’t get a vote in a year. Absolute joke
LikeLike
I think David Hollar, the Appellate Chief of the US Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Indiana, could be a compromise nominee for Kanne’s seat(https://www.luc.edu/law/faculty/facultyandadministrationprofiles/hollar-david.shtml). He clerked for 7th Circuit Judge Diane Wood (Clinton appointee).
@angren, @Zack Jones.
LikeLike
@aangren
I agree with a lot of what you said. One thing I will defend Biden on however is only sending some names to the senate yesterday & sending another batch later. If you look at the last post on the site about a week & a half or so ago I actually suggested Biden should do what he did.
Now Biden didn’t send all of the exact names I suggested, but the strategy I believe is the right one. You want to send the first batch with the names of those who have been waiting the longest for confirmation along with the oldest nominees to make sure they get confirmed first. As I’ve said before I think judicial nominees should be confirmed by age to make sure you maximize Democrat chief judges on each court. I
f you noticed, Biden did that yesterday. For instance, both district courts for Massachusetts & the Northern District of California have three pending nominees. Biden only sent one in each case & in both cases he sent the older of the three. I agree with this strategy. I do however completely agree Wamble should have been sent because circuit court nominees should be given priority in most cases.
LikeLike
Considering that a White House official told Reuters that the other half of the nominees will be resubmitted later this month, I think you are grossly overreacting regarding Wamble: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/biden-renominates-25-judicial-nominees-including-longest-pending-ones-2023-01-03/
LikeLike
@ aangren
That’s an interesting possibility. Another possible compromise candidate could be Federal Judge Damon Leichty, a Democrat appointed as part of a package in 2019.
LikeLike
Despite what some on here think, this is exactly what I suggested would happen. This is the Republican minority leader. He’s getting ready to whip Republican votes. They need only 11 Dems to confirm Laselle.
Like, why would Republicans waste such a golden opportunity to keep our COA conservative until around 2030? Just to stick it to Hochul? It would be the second most spectacular political failure for Republicans to not support this nomination — second only to Hochul’s failure in nominating Laselle in the first place.
And for all those who think that Hochul nominated Laselle to appeal to the tough on crime crowd, that’s a misapprehension of NY politics. His nomination is to appeal to hold on to latino support. At the first sign of trouble for this nomination, Team Hochul released a list of latino supports. this Latino for Laselle includes Lin-Manuel Miranda’s father, a well-connected political figure in NY.
As far as I see it, short of a withdrawal of this nomination, the only thing between Laselle and confirmation is Hoylman’s assertion that he wouldn’t move the nomination from the Judiciary committee to the floor if it’ll take Republicans to support. There’s going to be a lot of pressure on Hoylman either way. Let’s hope he’s good for it.
LikeLike
When does a majority party ever bring something to the floor that divides their caucus and relies on the opposition to pass? Can’t remember the last time that happened with Dems at the NY or federal level, and if his nomination fails, that will probably be the reason (rather than Hoylman). Honestly not sure why NY Dems would want to split their caucus to save a failure of a governor who performed dreadfully in the midterms, nominated a NYCOA judge that a core constituency (labor) opposes, and is vetoing bills left and right.
I do agree that the backlash to LaSalle on the left has likely made him more palatable to Republicans, but I’d be very surprised to see every single Republican vote for him if he were to get to the floor. I wouldn’t underestimate the hatred of Hochul in Republican circles, but I also wouldn’t underestimate their hatred of progressives.
LikeLike
Those are possibilities as well for the Indiana seat, have to wait and see.
As to the other post made, I’m sorry but we saw the confirmation of Circuit court nominees where blue slips didn’t matter (Mathis, Freeman) so this notion Biden and company are afraid to fight for nominees is bunk.
I get not liking Biden and Democrats but making up false stuff against them isn’t a good look IMO.
Finally, we have an outright majority now so IMO, we will likely see Democrats play hardball with circuit court nominees more now then they did when we had to worry about deadlocks.
Just have to see who the nominees will be.
LikeLike
Hollar and Leichty have been mentioned before as possible nominees for the Kanne vacancy, but has anyone looked into whether seats must come from a certain part of a state? There’s a federal statute requiring each state to have at least one appellate seat (I believe), and there’s a strong tradition of certain seats being associated with certain states (which came up in the whole debate over whether Cabranes’s seat “belonged” to NY or CT and whether McKeown’s seat belonged to WA or CA).
I haven’t seen as much on whether there’s as strong a tradition of seats belonging to certain regions within states? They replaced formerly Seattle-based McKeown with Eastern Washington-based Mendoza (even though Seattle had plenty of well-qualified very liberal lawyers), so seats can “move” within states. Within Indiana itself, the seat now held by Kirsch (Northern Indiana) was held by Tinder (Southern Indiana) before it went to Barrett (Northern Indiana).
The Kanne seat has always been held by a former NDIN judge since its inception so I think this works against Mario Garcia getting the nomination. However, there’s a strong basis to nominate someone from SDIN given (1) the precedent of CA7 seats moving around within Indiana and Northern Indiana already has 1 seat, (2) the fact that SDIN is much more populous/has more district judges, and (3) both current Senators are from Indianapolis or further south. I’m wondering how important the region thing is though.
Lastly, this will likely be the last Democratic nominee to CA7 for a while (unless Easterbrook or Rovner have health issues that prompt them to leave the bench), so I would hope Biden is strongly considering some Latino names. Not sure if there are other prominent Latino candidates from Indiana other than Garcia though.
LikeLike
I don’t see Andrea Stewart Cousins or Brad Hoylman allowing a floor vote if the majority of their members are opposed, regardless of what a letter says.
Lasalle is toast IMO, only a question of how his nomination fails.
LikeLike
Rovner is easily the most liberal Republican jurist left and has sided more and more with the Democratic jurists on the court then not.
Unless it’s party loyalty, I can see her taking senior status in the next couple of years.
Easterbrook isn’t leaving until a Republican is in office or his health forces him to.
LikeLike
My guess is that Rovner is just never going senior for reasons unrelated to ideology or party loyalty – she’s been eligible since the W Bush administration (and thus could’ve gone senior under Obama, when she would’ve been 74 in 2012) and hasn’t done so.
I’d love to be wrong about this, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for Rovner vacating her seat despite her liberal leanings – some judges just like being an active judge and sitting en banc/presiding over panels (though Biden should definitely be giving Rovner a call to encourage her to go senior).
LikeLike
Sinema’s change in party identification was officially spread upon the record yesterday. Look at paragraphs 3 and 4:
Click to access CREC-2023-01-02-pt1-PgS22.pdf
LikeLike
There is a vote scheduled for Jan 23, but it’s not a judge….I thought ALL nominees (executive or judicial) would have expired 12/31/22 since it was end of 117th Congress.
LikeLike
Again, there’s no ifs, buts, or maybes about returned nominees when the Senate adjourns sine die. It just happens. Always.
The senate yesterday agreed via a UC to discharge, debate, and vote on this nomination on 1/23.
Remember, UC is the skeleton key that opens (overrides) any senate rule.
LikeLike
This Owens was on the renomination list. I’m not sure what kind of move allows them to consider him on the floor without going to the armed services committee. Curious. At least they are able to take a vote their first day back.
LikeLike
I’m interested to see the new Senator committee assignments, hopefully soon. I think the judiciary committee should go to a 11-10 majority, so the only new Dem needed is one to replace Leahy. Any particular ideas or hopes? Only freshmen are Fetterman and Welch. Could go to one in their third year or so who wants to upgrade to a more prestigious or interesting role. Maybe Lujan for increased Latino representation.
LikeLike
Welch is a lawyer. Fetterman is not.
LikeLike
We discussed this a few times.
To repeat, I’m in the minority in hoping that the membership of STJ decreases to 19. In that case, no new members. This was the norm until very very recently, post 2019, I think. When Schumer negotiated a larger committee to avoid Kamala Harris from getting dropped, especially after her “star” performance in the Kavanaugh hearings and right when she was about to launch a presidential campaign.
The senate started the work of agreeing to a slate of organizing resolutions yesterday. This will continue when they return on 1/23. Don’t expect committee assignments or partisan make up before then.
LikeLike
Personally I would love dropping to 19 as well. No new additions and the GOP drops Sasse and someone else. My guess is they will settle on 11-10 though and add someone new.
LikeLike
For some reason I was in the mood to read up on a little history. I started reading up on judge Sarah T. Hughes that swore in LBJ after President Kennedy was assassinated. They have an entire section about criticism regarding her nomination as a federal judge and guess why… Because the administration thought she was too old to be a federal judge. I guess the Kennedy administration felt the same way I do now. She was 65 years old when she was confirmed. Geez… Lol
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_T._Hughes)
LikeLike
And some on this site would have us believe that age consideration is a new and inappropriate thing. I have read many books on the courts and I can tell you that age is normally considered when evaluating nominees, from the beginning of our republic.
LikeLike
I don’t doubt that, but should it be considered? It seems reasonable to want the most qualified nominee to be picked rather than have the president concerned about other factors.
LikeLike
Speaking of Wikipedia. How on the ball are they? As of this writing, they still haven’t updated the changes at the California Supreme Court.
LikeLike
Wikipedia users are more up to date on federal judges than state courts. It really just depend
LikeLike
Russ Feingold and the ACS want to get rid of blue slips, reduce the amount of post-cloture debate on circuit court nominees to 2 hours, and consider multiple nominees simultaneously: https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2023/1/4/2145335/-This-is-no-time-for-games-The-Senate-needs-to-amend-its-rules
LikeLike
With Debbie Stabenow’s announcement that she won’t run again, I can see Daines and the Republicans gleefully planning on making the seat competitive.
John James will probably be the frontrunner, if Trump doesn’t get involved.
What does the Democratic bench in Michigan look like?
We absolutely need to nominate and confirm the maximum number of judges possible between now and
2024, because 2024 is coming in hot…
LikeLike
I’m not overly worried. Michigan has the deepest bench of Democrats of any swing state. That’s why she’s stepping down. It could be any of the following:
-Governor Gretchen Whitmer (unlikely, but can’t rule out).
-Lt. Governor Garlin Gilchrist. (a black man like John James).
-Attorney General Dana Nessel (openly lesbian).
-Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson.
-Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin.
-Congresswoman Haley Stevens.
-former Congressman Andy Levin (doubtful since he’s 60 and lost to Stevens in a primary, but he has the family name).
-Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (definitely can’t win a primary but could still run).
-State Rep. Mallory McMorrow (went viral for her speech denouncing GOP attacks on Democrats as being “groomers”).
-Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg (moved his residence from Indiana to Michigan).
I agree that John James is the most likely Republican nominee. I doubt any Democrat mentioned above (save for Tlaib) could lose to James. I would be more worried if moderate Republicans like Fred Upton (only 3 years younger than Stabenow, so unlikely) or Peter Meijer (born 1988, also voted to impeach Trump and then lost his re-election primary) get the nomination.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Frank
I agree, there is an over reaction to those not yet renominated by Biden, save Pocan & Rodriguez. I myself suggested Biden not renominate all of the pending nominees all in one batch. This will be a non issue once the next batch comes.
@Ethan
I wasn’t aware Pete Buttigieg moved to Michigan. He would definitely be my front runner if Biden announces he is running in 2024. Garlin Gilchrist Was my front runner before I knew that because I don’t think Gretchen Whitmer will leave the governors seat despite me believing she would clear the field if she decided to jump in the race.
I definitely agree John James is most likely to be the Republican nominee, particularly with him winning in November. That could be a two for one for Democrats if he decides to run because his House seat will likely be amongst the top pickup opportunities along with the NY flipped seats.
LikeLike
Given that Meijer couldn’t win the primary in his district and Trump is certain to oppose him, I can’t see him surviving a statewide Republican primary even if McConnell backs him. Same with Upton, who is also less likely to run simply because of his age and retired from his safe Republican House seat because he couldn’t win the primary.
I’m hardly an optimist, but I think the Michigan Republicans are in a tough spot because a moderate Republican candidate that would make the Senate race competitive is going to struggle in a primary for that exact reason.
LikeLike
Sure Michigan will be competitive, but two-time loser John James is hardly going to strike fear into the hearts of Dems. I’m glad Stabenow’s retiring because she hasn’t been the best on judges – she and Peters caved and returned blue slips for arch-conservative Larsen to CA6 under Trump, and they recommended Stephanie Davis to Biden for CA6 when Michigan had younger/more liberal candidates.
Dem bench in Michigan is pretty deep, especially after they routed the Republicans back in November. I doubt Whitmer’s going to give up the governorship to (probably) be in the Senate minority, but AG Nessel or SoS Benson have won statewide office. There are also lots of House Democrats who were elected in 2018/20 and might run for the open seat – Slotkin, Scholten, Stevens, and maybe Kildee or Levin (though I hope Levin wises up and runs for John James’ current seat this time). Then throw in Buttigieg, who moved to Michigan to “be closer to his in-laws” (though everyone knows his chances for higher office were DOA in Indiana) and will 1000% run for this seat, and maybe state senator Mallory McMorrow (who gave that viral speech fighting back against Republican BS and has since become a big fundraiser). Stabenow also won by a underwhelming margin in 2018 (Whitmer did better), so I honestly don’t think there’s that much of an incumbency advantage that Dems lose here if they pick a strong candidate.
100% agree about confirming as many judges as possible (and hopefully getting the remaining Clinton appeals court appointees to go senior) because Michigan will be the least of Dems’ worries in 2024 – hard to see how we keep WV, MT, and probably even OH in a presidential year with ticket-splitting no longer much of a thing, but then again 2022 turned out better than I had dared to dream.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gavi, I expect Elissa Slotkin (current Rep) to enter the race and ultimately win the nomination. She’s won three times in fairly competitive districts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Senator Casey announced he has prostate cancer.
Get well soon senator !
LikeLike
Last comment on Michigan – I really, really hope Eric Clay on CA6 goes senior soon (I’m surprised and disappointed that he didn’t in the last 2 years). He’s probably the most liberal active judge on CA6 at this point (though rumored to be difficult as a person) so the Biden admin should offer him his choice of ambassadorship or plum position or whatever to get him to vacate his seat.
Between solicitor general Fadwa Hammoud, new Michigan Supreme Court Justice Kyra Harris Bolden, and veteran Michigan Supreme Court Justice Richard Bernstein, there are plenty of chances for Biden to pick a young, diverse candidate – and in the case of Hammoud or Bernstein, a historic one as either the first Muslim or first blind (I believe?) COA judge. Not sure which would be the most progressive of the three because I haven’t dealt that much into their records, but other than Bolden (simply because of her age and the fact that she was just appointed to the Michigan Supreme Court a couple weeks ago), they don’t seem like they would be difficult to get confirmed.
LikeLike
Maybe he’ll wait a bit so that Jonathan J.C. Grey can have more seasoning as a district judge and then he could be elevated. We need more black men on circuit courts.
LikeLike
I don’t disagree with having more Black men on appellate courts (though I personally think Biden is right to prioritize Black women appellate judges given how that there were only 8 before 2020). However, Grey’s resume is essentially identical to Davis’s and pretty much what we saw under Obama – ex-AUSA turned magistrate judge turned district judge. I’m assuming this was Stabenow or Peters’ recommendation, which is another reason I’m not particularly sad about Stabenow’s retirement.
I’m all for picking another Black man if that would get Clay to retire (and even if it didn’t), but hopefully there’s a pick with a more progressive record than Grey’s – otherwise all of Michigan’s CA6 judges will be either Republicans or prosecutors.
I also lean toward Hammoud if we’re solely looking at demographic diversity because (1) she would be the first ever Muslim judge, and (2) there are fewer states/possible vacancies with a Muslim candidate that also has the traditional experience for a circuit vacancy. Maybe Quraishi to replace Greenaway in NJ, but Quraishi literally represented ICE so I’m not sure how progressive he is/if that would be a good pick.
LikeLike
@Hank
I too hope he steps down. My top pick would be Jonathan J.C. Grey, especially if he gets a year or so experience on the district court. While it would be great to see the first Muslim court of appeals judge, Fadwa Hammoud would mean both of Biden’s Michigan pics were near their mid 50’s so I wouldn’t want to see her be picked now, despite me wanting her to be picked for the Stephanie Davis seat.
I honestly don’t know enough about Justice Kyra Harris Bolden other then her she (Which is outstanding) but if David wasn’t the previous pick, I would have said her just to see a Black woman on the circuit. I will trust the governor on this one & assume she is at least reliably fairly liberal. If I had to pick a sitting Justice, I would probably go with Richard Bernstein. He is without question liberal. Perhaps picking him could increase the changes or Gould retiring as I believe he is the only sitting circuit court judge with a disclosed physical disability. But with only one (Hopefully two once Wamble is confirmed) Black men confirmed as circuit court judges in in the past 9 years as of next week Friday, I think that’s one area that I would like to see Biden increase with his picks along with more Hispanics & law professors.
LikeLike
Is Hammoud in her 50s? I’m not seeing that based on anything I could find – in fact, this article indicates that she immigrated to the US when she was 11, and Hammoud herself states that she came over in the “late 90s.” https://muslimgirl.com/meet-fadwa-hammoud-the-solicitor-general-of-michigan/. Even if we assume she was 11 in 1995, that would only make her 38 now. I’m fine with another Black male nominee, but I take issue with Grey for the reasons discussed above.
I’ve seen it mentioned a few times that there aren’t enough Black male nominees to the court of appeals, and I just wanted to address that briefly. To be fair to the Biden administration, I fault them less for that because (1) there have been so many Black women nominees and (2) it’s hard to juggle both race and gender (and other issues like Senators’ preferences, professional background, age, confirmability, etc.) with only so many appellate vacancies to go around. There’s also only been one Latina appellate nominee (Perez – I wouldn’t count Kahn since she’s Portuguese from Angola/Portugal) and one Asian male appellate nominee (Lee), and I haven’t heard anyone take issue with that – even MALDEF’s concerns were more about Latino nominees in general rather than Latinas specifically. It was definitely frustrating to see Trump not nominate any Black men to the appellate courts, but even with that, I believe there were more Black male appellate judges than there were Asian male or Latina appellate judges (and possibly both Asian men and Latinas combined).
All this to say that I definitely want to see more Black men (and Asian men and Latinas) nominated to the appellate courts. However, if it’s a choice between a more centrist Black man (like Grey) and a more progressive nominee of another race/gender, I’d still prefer the other candidate – demographic diversity is important, but a decision that limits/declines to strengthen the rights of the average person of color is no better because the judge who wrote it was also a person of color (on an unrelated note, this should be the response in NY to the argument by some Latinos that LaSalle should be confirmed to the NYCOA just because he’s Latino).
LikeLike
@Hank
Oh I definitely agree I want the right Black men on the courts. For instance I would gladly take a white man like John Rappaport for the 7th circuit over any of the Black men that were recommended to Biden for the Northern Illinois district court vacancies. My argument was I don’t agree Grey isn’t the right Black man. Albeit I will admit there are probably more progressive picks from Michigan, but I’m factoring in his age plus the lack of Black men on the circuit courts.
The one area I would disagree with you on is comparing the number of Biden nominees with respect to Black men versus other demographics. That is because dating back to the 4 years of Trump & last two years of Obama, there were no Black men confirmed to the circuit courts. Next week Friday makes 9 full years since Robert Wilkins was confirmed & we have only seen Andre Mathis since. On the other hand Trump got numerous Hispanic & AAPI judges confirmed during his 4 years & in Obama’s last two years, he only got two confirmed & both were Hispanic.
Obviously the judges Trump out in the court aren’t the types I want to see on the courts, but if we are just talking demographics irregardless of ideology, Black men have more ground to make up since 2014.
But as you said, regardless we want the right kind of judges on the bench. At least we have two more years to get it right… Lol
LikeLike
@Ethan
You judiciary nominees chart had Fadwa Hammond born c. 1969 correct? Hank stated it looked like she was much younger but I was going by the age of your chart t when I said she was near her mid 50’s.
LikeLike
@Hank. I ran Fadwa Hammoud’s name through a people search site and it said she was born December 1969.
LikeLike
@Dequan
Yes you’re completely right it’s a travesty that Trump didn’t nominate any Black judges (though to be fair, I don’t think either of us want more Clarence Thomases or Janice Brown Rogers). But even without any Trump nominees, there were 15 active Black male appellate judges when Biden took over in 2021: Thomas, Stewart, McKee, Cole, Clay, Wilson, Gregory, Smith, Holmes, Greenaway, Wynn, Lohier, Graves, Watford, Wilkins. That’s not counting senior judges like Parker who are still hearing cases.
I also think the apt comparison is not Black men to Latino or Asian judges overall, but specifically Latina/Hispanic women and Asian men (as those are the two other racial/gender combinations with very few Biden nominees). At the beginning of the Biden administration? there were 5 Latina/female Hispanic appellate judges: Sotomayor, Wardlaw, Callahan, Murguia, Fernandez Stoll, and Lagoa (Trump’s sole Latina appellate nominee). At the same time, there were 8 Asian male nominees: Thapar, Chin, Ho, Lee, Park, Bumatay, Srinivasan, Chen.
There’s an argument that the 8 Asian male nominees are more disproportionate to the number of Asian men in the general population than Black male federal judges to Black men in the general population. That argument would not work for Latinas, however, given the small number of Latina judges and the fact that Latinas/Hispanic women make up a larger percent of the the general population than Black men as of the 2020 census.
Again, just to be clear: I am not saying (and would never say) that we have enough Black male appellate judges or don’t need more Black men. We absolutely do. There is just not a SUCH a lack of Black men compared to other demographics that we should be accepting more centrist candidates. Grey would be a fine/acceptable nominee, but should Biden get a chance to replace Clay, it would be a disservice to the people of color of the Sixth Circuit not to put a more progressive nominee on that Court when there are currently 15 active Black male appellate judges (McKee was replaced by Freeman, a Black woman, but Mathis replaced a Black woman). I haven’t yet crunched the numbers, but my educated guess is that 15 is close to if not the historical high in terms of Black male appellate judges.
We can just say there should be more black male nominees period, which is a valid position on its own merits – even if there’s more than there’s ever been before, that doesn’t mean there can’t be more. I just don’t think the facts support the claim that there are especially few Black men on the appellate courts now or that there are fewer Black men than other race/gender combinations. The fact that Trump didn’t nominate any Black men is a valid point, but also true for Black women (and he only nominated a single Latina).
LikeLike
@Ethan I wouldn’t say those websites are the most reliable, so I question whether December 1969 is actually accurate given the article I shared. Maybe better to leave her age as unclear/TBD until there’s a more reliable source.
LikeLike
@Hank
Yes definitely on all your points. Hopefully with 51 senators now, we will get the more progressive nominees we both are looking for. If I could make a deal to get the 14 more-circuit court vacancies Biden needs to fill in order to pass Trump’s 54 & all 14 had to be filled with
White men but as progressive or to the left of John Rapporport, I would take that deal in a New York minute. It would hurt not to see additional diversity added to the courts, but between the great strides Biden has made in the past two years, I would take a lack of diversity over the next two years in any category if it just meant more liberal judges.
Of course, the one caveat I am not willing to negotiate on is age. I know some on this site is perfectly fine with nominating older judges in their mid 50’s & older but I’m just not. But everything else you said I definitely agree with.
LikeLike
@Hank. For anything from those sites, I always say “circa”.
LikeLike
Couple of points I want to make.
First of all, I wish Stabenow well in her retirement and I won’t fault her for Larsen, as blue slips for Circuit court nominees under Trump were ignored.
It’s under George W with equally conservative judge Raymond Kethledge that she and Carl Levin screwed up.
Blue slips never should have been returned for a seat Democrats were certainly going to be able to fill after 08.
I do like the choices you gave Hank but I think just having won reelection, Bernstein might want to stay where he’s at.
IF he became the nominee, he would the 2nd blind circuit court judge after David Tatel of the D.C. Circuit.
LikeLike
Wanted to add that I would much prefer Kyra Harris Bolden be the nominee IF Clay takes senior status.
Just have to wait and see.
LikeLike
I’m hoping Ohio is going to be a lot less difficult to keep than the midterm made it seem.
Vance won by 6% but Dewine won by 25%, so 3/4 of that 25% margin split their votes for Tim Ryan. I think the governors race pulled Vance across the finish line.
Trump only won by 8% in 2020 and the environment will be better in 24’ than 22’ was for Dems. Inflation won’t be at 8% but the threat of a national abortion ban will still be on every women’s mind when voting.
LikeLike
Not really sad about the retirement of Debbie Stabenow, as the regeneration of the Democratic Caucus dropped out wth Peter Welch beeing just one year younger than Patrick Leahy when his first term is over.
And for Gary Peters the Senior Senator is in sight – I think highly deserved, because I think he’s underestimated.
Just noted, that R. Guy Cole will go senior next Monday, and won’t wait until Rachel Bloomkatz will be confirmed.
https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-vacancies/future-judicial-vacancies
Hence I believe it’s time to fill the open gaps now before we turn to Eric Clay and Karen Moore – though we should before 2024.
LikeLike
We can eliminate any talk of Gretchen Whitmer or Pete Buttigieg running for the Michigan senate seat. Both have already taken their names out of contention.
(https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/05/politics/debbie-stabenow-reelection/index.html)
LikeLike
Pete knows he is too fresh to Michigan to leap frog others and Whitmer IMO wants to fulfil her term as governor first before worrying about anything else.
LikeLike
Well, this is awkward…:
https://www.crainsdetroit.com/courts/justice-bernstein-disgusted-bolden-hiring-ex-convict
The clerk in question has since resigned, but there’ll still be bad blood between the two liberals.
“I’m no longer talking to her. We don’t share the same values,” Bernstein said.”
Does this take Bernstein out of contention for the 6th circuit for you people here who were boosting him as a possibility earlier today?
LikeLike
Yes and it very well could hurt Bolden’s chances as well, given there are a few Democrats who think like Bernstein does.
LikeLike
I don’t think it should disqualify Bernstein from a Circuit Court seat should he want it, but there is a certain wing of the base that will put a stop to it should Biden or another Democrat consider him. Bolden would need a larger Democratic Senate majority to be confirmed with her baggage.
LikeLike
Honestly, this likely puts both of them out of the running.
LikeLike
I don’t understand her thinking.
It’s one thing to be pro-rehabilitation for ex-con who’s served their time, but this seems to just be poking thumb, possibly ruining her chance for judicial elevation and definitely ruining the collegiality on Michigan’s Supreme Court with at least one other justice. And with the clerk in question resigning, she gets nothing. Her action not only jeopardized her future, it also jeopardized Bernstein’s because he was forced to respond in a way that some of the Dem base might find objectionable, whether or not you agree. A total lose-lose-lose-lose.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But despite my personal disgust at Bernstein’s reaction, I agree that this was not a great move for Bolden politically – especially as Michigan Supreme Court justices have to run for re-election. Surprising given that she has a past in electoral politics and should know better about this kind of thing.
At the same time, aren’t Republicans/conservatives all about a meritocracy? Law clerks are essentially research assistants for a judge who have no actual decision-making power, so they are in theory hired because they have sharp legal minds/did well in law school, so if that’s the case (which it appears to be here), this is another example of conservative hypocrisy.
I also resent Bernstein’s implication that this is somehow worse because he shot at a cop rather than a civilian – the fact that the victim voluntarily took on that risk as part of his profession is very noble of the victim, but it doesn’t make his life more valuable than any of ours.
LikeLike
Wow how petty of Bernstein – what is this, middle school? Is Bernstein’s assumption that this guy committed a crime and thus can’t be trusted to even like research issues of Michigan tort or contract law? If he thinks a clerk’s criminal history will somehow sway the judge’s decision-making, then I’m very concerned about how many of the thoughts in his opinions are his own (versus something a new law school grad wrote that he signed off on with a cursory review).
Given that Justice McCormack also praised the clerk as a great student who turned his life around, I’m not sure where he gets off on being “completely disgusted” by this. Surely he also expressed complete disgust about Kosinski and the way he treated his clerks…oh wait, there aren’t public comments from Bernstein on that? Guess the man is blind in more ways than one.
But yes I agree that Bolden’s odds of getting elevated are hit by this (though I’m not convinced Bernstein’s would be, given that Biden and the Dems are eager to seem tough on crime). I’m obviously disgusted with Bernstein’s reaction, but my opinion isn’t the one that matters. Anybody considering him for higher office should take note of the fact that he went gabbing to the press at the first opportunity (hardly judge-like behavior).
LikeLike
“I also resent Bernstein’s implication that this is somehow worse because he shot at a cop rather than a civilian.”
True, but I think we too often confuse morals with politics.
“Radical Justice Hires Attempted Cop-Killer Ex-Con”
The headline writes itself. No nuance, no context, just sensational knee-jerk revolution. That’s the politics of this.
You are right Bolden should have known better, politically speaking. Despite what you think of her actions, this seems like an own-goal to me.
LikeLike
@Gavi oh yes 100% agree that this is an unforced political error on Bolden’s part. This is something a federal judge with life tenure (and no desire/expectation of elevation) would do, not a 34-year-old state Supreme Court Justice who has to run for re-election and could (and maybe is expected to) be elevated at some point.
But Bernstein’s disgust wasn’t because it’s a bad move for Bolden politically, so that’s why I made that comment.
LikeLike
I have to say this seems like a really ugly attack from justice Richard Bernstein. It’s one thing to privately or on the record say you disagree with the practice of hiring clerks with a criminal record. It’s totally different to be “disgusted”, blast another justice & then for good measure say “I’m no longer talking to her. We don’t share the same values”. I’m not sure that would mature even in middle school, let alone on the highest court in any state.
I believe Justice Kyra Harris Bolden helped herself in this entire ordeal. For her to be willing to give a second chance to somebody that a fellow justice said “was one of her best students” is in line with the kind of character Biden is looking for in his nominees. And the way she handled the attack by releasing a statement & stating she will not be commenting further, I don’t see hurting her chances whatsoever for future elevation. I think she can use this incident to show she’s mature enough even at a young age to serve in such a high capacity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Dequan
The thing is, the clerk in question didn’t steal a candy bar or smoke a joint. This is the attempted murder of a policeman, whose entire job is protecting the law-abiding. Like Hank says, the headline writes itself.
LikeLike
With her youth, I can see this not being a major issue in a second Biden term. At the end of the day, Republicans attack even the most moderate nominees these days. I think it’s smart to energize the base now. She has plenty of time to build a record that will make her confirmable. I don’t see this as a death shot for her chances at being elevated at all. Perhaps a decade or more ago that would have been the case but not so much now. This is nothing worse that will upset any police unions more than Nusrat Jahan Choudhury who will be confirmed in less than a few months.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see my endorsement a couple of days ago has well and truly jinxed Judge Bernstein…
I kind of get what he was saying, but it was an unprofessional way of expressing his views. If someone has been rehabilitated by the criminal justice system, then flagging up their past conduct with actual evidence of present risk is bad morality and worse practice.
LikeLike
Haha, please please endorse Hector Laselle!
But seriously, it just goes to show that the political fortunes (perceived and otherwise) of people can change really quickly.
LikeLike
*without actual evidence
LikeLike
Stabenow’s retirement is a calculated move if we consider what pundits claimed after 2016 (that is, the claim that Michigan is moving rightward). However, Democrats won big in Michigan in 2022, so it appears that Michigan is shifting a little bit back towards Democrats.
However, if the rightward shift is true, it’s wise for Stabenow to retire while a non-incumbent Democrat can still win in Michigan. I think Democrats likely hold this seat, however, it’s possible that Michigan votes for both Biden and a new GOP senator (it is very unlikely that Trump wins Michigan again based on the numbers since his 0.23% win in the state in 2016)
LikeLike
@Ryan Joshi
As if now, the Democrats are more likely than not to win this race. It doesn’t mean they’re guaranteed to win, but the numbers are on their side.
Will there be a crowded primary? That’s the billion dollar question.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree to that.
LikeLike
@Ryan Joshi
My last posting didn’t post.
Democrats are more likely than not to hold this seat. Will there be a crowded primary? That’s the billion dollar question.
LikeLike