Judge Vernon Oliver – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut

For the past fourteen years, Vernon D. Oliver has served as a judge on the Superior Court in Middlesex, Connecticut. Now, with the support of Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, Oliver has been nominated for the District of Connecticut.

Background

Vernon D. Oliver earned his B.A. from the University of Connecticut in 1994 and his J.D. from the University of Connecticut Law School in 1997. After graduating law school, Oliver spent a year at Monstream & May LLP in Glastonbury before joining the State of Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice as an assistant state’s attorney. In 2004, Oliver joined the Connecticut Attorney General’s Office. In 2009, Gov. M. Jodi Rell appointed Oliver to be a judge on the Middlesex District Superior Court, where he currently serves.

History of the Seat

Oliver was nominated to a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut on May 4, 2023. The vacancy opened on November 1, 2022, with Judge Stefan Underhill’s move to senior status.

Legal Career

Oliver started his legal career in the Glastonbury office of Monstream and May, but became an assistant state’s attorney after just a year there. As an assistant state’s attorney, Oliver prosecuted a variety of crimes, including briefing cases before appellate courts. See, e.g., State v. Buddhu, 65 Conn. App. 104 (2001). That case involved a state appeal of a trial judge’s decision to dismiss the charge against the defendant by finding that the search warrant underlying the evidence was invalid. See id. The appellate court disagreed and affirmed. See id. at 106. In another notable case, Oliver was part of a legal team that successfully persuaded the Connecticut Supreme Court to reinstate a conviction thrown out by the appellate court. See State v. Ramos, 271 Conn. 785 (2004).

In 2004, Oliver shifted to Connecticut Attorney General’s Office, working under Blumenthal, who was then the elected Attorney General. While with the office, Oliver worked on child protection matters, also appearing before appellate courts. See, e.g., In re Stephen M., 953 A.2d 668 (Conn. App. 2008).

Jurisprudence

Oliver has served as a Judge on the Connecticut Superior Court since 2009, when he was appointed by Gov. M. Jodi Rell. In this role, Oliver has served as a trial court judge, presiding over criminal, civil, family, and housing cases. Among his rulings, Oliver rejected a habeas claim brought by a pro se inmate, who alleged that his constitutional rights were being violated by correctional staff by preventing him from mailing unauthorized items. See Dorlette v. Melendez, No. 3:15-cv-1856 (VAB) (D. Conn. Feb. 26, 2020). Oliver presided over a bench trial in the case and ruled against the plaintiff, which he failed to timely appeal. See id. Instead, the plaintiff filed a federal suit, where Judge Victor Bolden granted summary judgment to the defendants, essentially affirming Oliver’s ruling. See id.

Overall Assessment

Oliver has served on the state bench for fourteen years, and has an additional ten years of litigation experience with little controversy behind him. Barring the unexpected, he should be confirmed in due course.

101 Comments

  1. Given Vernon Oliver’s close ties to Richard Blumenthal and his work on workman’s comp and child protection issues, progressives don’t have much to worry about. At the same time, he has a conventional background and no history of inflammatory writings or legal decisions. He should have a comfortable confirmation.

    Like

  2. Oliver is certainly qualified & seems to be close to Blumenthal. I’m happy to see a district court that will have three Black men on it (I believe the Central District of California is the only other district court with 3 active Black men who doesn’t have dual district courts on it).

    Some negatives is this nominee is in his 50’s & there are younger options in the state. He also is unaffiliated so that combined with him being appointed by a Republican governor gives me pause. But nothing that would make me hope he isn’t confirmed. Connecticut has one other vacancy so I am hoping for a younger progressive for that seat.

    Like

      • Marisol Orihuela & Maria Garcia were my 3rd & 4th pick myself. I doubt my 1st & 2nd picks, who were my two picks for the 2nd circuit would want it. Both Cristina Rodriguez & Justin Driver would probably rather start at Yale th be district court judges in a circuit that is unlikely to have another CT vacancy anytime soon.

        Like

  3. The SJC hearing just adjourned. No vote on Delaney as we predicted. Senator Blackburn thanked Durbin for pulling him for a markup today. She then HAMMERED senator Hirono without mentioning her by name. The meeting started getting good. Senator Graham then started talking. He said he was inclined to support Delaney but he wasn’t ready for prime time. He then read off 8 progressive groups that are not supporting him. Graham said he is a no on Delaney.

    I am hoping Delaney will do the right thing & withdraw because I don’t think Biden will withdraw him more it’ll the New Hampshire senators withdraw their support. I can see this getting dragged out until he is returned at the end of the year. I hope he understands the importance of this seat & not do that.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Despite the demagoguing of the issue, I support the Delaney nomination, but it’s obvious going nowhere, which is the problem.
    With Graham’s no, maybe NOW the nomination can die? It’s crazy how the 4 sides (WH, NH senators, Durbin, nominee) are continuing to play with this vacancy. Like there’s nothing on the line. The WH, Durbin, or the nominee could put an end to this saga right now. In fact, Durbin just missed an opportunity to do so.

    Separately, I’m embarrassed for Hirono. She just allows Blackburn to tear into her unanswered. It was very strategic of Blackburn to call Hirono a hypocrite for possibly supporting the Delaney nomination while always asking questions about sexual harassment. (I think Hirono is also a no on the nomination, but Hirono gave Blackburn free rein, so she did.)

    Like

    • I think anybody that knows me knows I’m no fan of senator Blackburn. I must say her attack today on Hirono was brilliant. I too can’t believe she didn’t come back out to answer it. While I disagree with @Gavi about still supporting this nomination (Let’s be honest I was against it from the beginning… Lol) I do agree with everything else you said. This needs to end & quickly. I’m hoping Delaney does the right thing & withdraw because I think both New Hampshire senators will fight to the death otherwise.

      I also don’t see the WH withdrawing support after pulling New Hampshire status as first in the nation to vote in the primary. This will either come down to the nominee withdrawing or his nomination being returned at the end of the year. Knowing the time it takes for confirmation, I’m truly hoping for the former & not the latter.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I couldn’t believe Sen Cotton (who looks like Anthony Perkins from “Psycho”) had the nerve to talk about Rachel Rollins, but he sure didn’t mention all the very questionable gifts and travel Justice Thomas has engaged in. Hypocrite

    Like

  7. Even though she didn’t respond to Blackburn, it was pretty clear Hirono was going to be a no vote, as were other Democratic senators.
    I just think they didn’t want to say so on the record out of respect for NH’s Senators.
    Honestly, we should be happy with this, as whomever the replacement is likely to be younger and to the left of Delaney.

    Like

  8. I would anticipate Elliott getting the nomination as she is fairly non controversial. She seems fine to me. As others have said the biggest risk was in letting this nomination labor for another 6-12 months.

    Like

  9. Regarding Vernon Oliver, I’ll admit as a CT resident that I wasn’t really high on his nomination initially, but after reading this post feel like this was a very solid pick. Looking forward to seeing him confirmed quickly.

    Like

  11. Schumer told the senate they “should be prepared to return to the Senate within a 24-hour period to fulfill their responsibilities to avoid default.” I hope they take care of it on the recess week next week so it doesn’t take much time once the senate returns.

    Ok they just called the Abudu vote. I sat through whining from Blackburn, Ricketts & Lee to get to this point. I’m excited.

    Like

  12. Nancy Abudu confirmed 49-47. Manchin voted no. This is only the second NO vote from a Democrat against a Biden nominee & first for a final vote. Congratulations 11th circuit. You got an outstanding new judge.

    Like

  13. Its Good to see abudu finally confirmed 49-47 it was real close. Having even that one extra senate seat is crucial.This gives me hope that rikelman and ho will be confirmed as well, if sinema can vote for abudu no reason to vote against rikelman and less likely dale ho, but he should still be ok as well. Lee is such a bad faith partisan hack seeing that he has objections is awesome.
    I hope delaney replacement can be nominated very quickly.

    Next month will be one year since the kanne vacancy on the 7th circuit open up and not even an inkling of a nominee the bad faith indiana senator hacks are just going to buy time and goad biden along they are clearly stalling. assume the default position of the gop senators being bad faith hacks

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Graham’s speech is indeed hilarious.

    He does make a good point that the WH needs to step it up and prepare nominees better. No reason why every nominee shouldn’t be prepared to answer Kennedy’s law school quizzes.

    Like

  16. I have to give Sen Sinema come credit….She’s always conversing with Republicans on the senate floor, but she continues to support all judicial nominees….I’d bet on Abudu, senate Republicans were probably begging her “come on Krysten, just vote no on this nominee, she’s the worst” blah blah blah…

    I think Abudu is the most controversial Biden nominee thus far, so if she got confirmed, the others should as well

    Like

    • I notice that as well when I’m watching the senate proceedings too. I’ve said all along if Sinema would have cut the antics & stayed a Democrat, I think she would have been the favorite to win re-election. I think her leaving the Democrat party was a mistake for her. But I am grateful she has remained rock solid on voting yes for Biden’s judges & also grateful one of my 10 A+ circuit court judges was her recommendation for the 9th circuit.

      Like

      • I was so happy when Kelly won reelection because I was positive that if he can win, so can Sinema as long as nobody primaried her.

        That joy was short lived. What sucks is she’s very socially liberal but wall street friendly views and unwillingness to break the filibuster really destroyed her with the Arizona Democrat base. They think AZ is blue, when it’s red leaning but hates MAGA candidates. She shouldn’t just kept quiet and let Manchin get the blame.

        So she goes independent, we have a 3 way race and I might end up with Kari Lake as my senator. I really hope she takes those 19% polling number to heart, doesn’t run for reelection and is happy to take a big lobbying gig.

        Like

      • @Mike I don’t believe she’ll run, but I’d never rule anything out. More than likely she’ll take a huge lobbying job somewhere and make a ton of money. She would have been well served from taking a page from Kelly’s playbook, tracked slightly to the left, and remained with the party. She probably would have gotten the nomination again.

        Like

      • @Joe

        Right. She was fine playing some of her games & being pen pals with Mitch McConnell since she voted 100% of the time on judges. I even would say she was ok with not getting rid of the filibuster. But saying she would bring back the filibuster for circuit court vacancies, leaving the Democrat Party & then bashing them like a school kid es a bridge too far. She had a winning hand but overplayed it.

        @Mitch

        I haven’t seen any pictures of Vernon Oliver but I’ll be sure to take one from his SJC hearing & post it on his Wikipedia page. He likely will have a hearing the week after next.

        Like

  17. Wow!
    I absolutely love this!
    First off, I don’t have much of an opinion on the nominee herself, so I am not advocating that her nomination be defeated or approved.
    I just want to highlight the fact that only a few years ago, a former clerk signing a letter for a fellow former clerk probably wouldn’t even have made it into the record. Now, it’s being used to tank a nomination. This is excellent! Can you imagine being so toxic that a former coworker’s mere letter in support of you is now a scarlet letter around that coworker’s neck?
    This shows that the states have woken up to how dangerous the federal courts have become and are now more earnestly protecting their citizens against those dangers. This is a great development.
    This development also shows how out of touch and anachronistic those people are who think nothing can change or it isn’t worth trying to change how things are done, or the old chestnut that liberals don’t care about the courts, etc. Just within the last couple months (in some cases, weeks and days) in the Tri-state area (NY, NJ, CT) we are seeing high court nominations and actions on these nominations that few could imagine a few years ago.
    In another regional state, PA, the stage is set for supreme court general election later this year.
    This doesn’t just happen. Let the old timers guard their yards. We’ll be guarding our rights.
    Your move, Tina Kotek of Oregon.

    https://www.wshu.org/connecticut-news/2023-05-17/confirmation-of-lamonts-connecticut-supreme-court-nominee-in-trouble

    Like

    • @Gavi

      AMEN. I hope we finally can put to rest on this blog that sitting down on your hands doing nothing is not the right approach for change. It’s amazing when you take people’s rights away how quickly they wake up. Great point about the Tri-state area (NY, NJ, CT) in the past couple of months. I hope this sends shock waves throughout Democrat state houses across the country.

      We saw governor Murphy make his third spectacular pick to the SCOT-NJ. And even his mandated Republican pick was an older barely right of center pick. He & governor Whitmer should be the model for governors across the country. I actually like governor Lamont & am surprised all of his SCOT-CT picks have been lackluster. I opposed this pick from the beginning so I’m happy to see she is getting push back & I hope she is defeated & more importantly I hope Lamont gets some advice from is neighbor to the Southwest on picking her replacement… Lol

      Liked by 1 person

  22. Good timing Senate. Seeing Garcia and Abudu confirmed during my finals week makes it a little more bearable. So far, the Senate has confirmed Biden judges during my finals week 4 times in a row, and this time finishing up right when I’m finishing finals. I would be very irritated if the Senate was taking time off while I had to study for finals.

    Judges confirmed during my finals week:
    Koh, Sung, a bunch of district judges (Dec 2021)
    Rochon, Thompson, Sykes (May 2022)
    Montgomery-Reeves, Douglas (Dec 2022)
    Garcia, Daniel, Abudu (May 2023)

    Like

    • @Ryan Joshi

      Good luck on your finals buddy. Seeing Garcia & Abudu confirmed, governor Murphy pick his third outstanding justice, both Jacksonville & Colorado Springs have Democrat upsets in mayoral races & Michael Delaney withdraw all in one week makes me want to take a final exam & I graduated from FIU already… Lol

      Liked by 1 person

  24. My hope before August is that Bloomekatz, Rikelman, da Alba, Ramirez, and the 20 district nominees that have cleared judiciary will have been confirmed.

    There are 7 working weeks between now and then. I assume that one will go to the debt ceiling, another one to NDAA, and probably another one for random bills or executive nominees. No reason that those 24 nominees can’t all get floor votes between no and then. But then again I am the eternal optimist on this board haha.

    Like

    • Remember my recap from the other day. Out of the remaining weeks the senate is in session before the Summer recess, only TWO are full weeks. The rest are Tuesday 5pm – Thursday weeks. And this year the Summer recess is FIVE weeks long, not four weeks like in past years. If they just maintained last years schedule through September, all pending nominees could get confirmed. I am not so sure with this schedule. Perhaps if Ramírez is a voice vote they can get it done.

      Like

  25. I don’t think Ramirez will be a voice vote. But maybe she’ll get put straight on the calendar like Desai was last year.

    I’m sure that all 24 of those nominees will not happen, but if we can get even 3 dedicated weeks on judges that will go a long way. At the very least there are 14 district nominees from 2021+2022 and we should easily get those done.

    I’d also like to say that I’d like all 5 pending circuit vacancies (maybe giving some leeway because of Delaney) to have at least have nominees at some point in the process.

    Like

  26. Nancy Abudu is the only Biden circuit court nominee that had to wait a year or longer for confirmation. On Thursday, Rachel Bloomekatz will become the second. Hopefully there will not be a third. As long as Julie Rikelman is confirmed before the August recess, there likely won’t be another.

    Like

  27. Definitely. Those two are my absolute top priority. I hope Schumer puts them up for a vote more or less immediately after the recess or after any Debt Ceiling votes that need to take place.

    Bloomekatz may get Manchin’s vote still and be fairly straightforward. Particularly given Sen. Brown’s strong support.

    Rikelman likely will not get Manchin’s vote, but if they schedule a Wednesday night cloture vote like they did this week then odds are a few R senators will be out of town.

    Like

    • And with Delaney out, I think Rikelman & Ho are the two most likely judges left that Manchin would vote no on. So just make sure the VP & the other 50 Dems are in town ready to break a tie for those two.

      On another subject, I was talking to @Ethan the other day & he brought up a brilliant idea. If 11th circuit court judge Charles Wilson went senior status, Nancy Abudu could change duty stations to Florida where he is from. She has deep ties to Florida so if she is willing to do that, then Biden could negotiate with Ossoff & Warnock to replace Wilson for a Georgia seat instead of with Rubio & Scott for a Florida seat.

      I’m not sure if they are that strategic but it would be brilliant if they were. I would love nothing more than the Goergia senators to get another circuit court pick at the expense of the Florida senators. There is precedent for this so all it would take is for judge Abudu to be willing to more to the Sunshine state. I know a good real estate agent if that helps… Lol

      Like

      • That would be quite clever indeed.

        Hopefully if Wilson does go senior it isn’t until next year sometime. By then Biden would probably have the 3 recent compromise picks confirmed and perhaps even more if there is another deal to be made with Scott. If that is the case there would be less incentive to work with the FL senators and they could just get whoever they want.

        Rubio and Scott are going to hate it either way, so we might as well get someone good.

        Like

      • Definitely. That is another reason I hope they are not just planning on three Southern district nominees that was reported without quick succession for the fourth vacancy that has already been announced as well as the middle district vacancies. When Abudu was announced I actually though she was for Florida & I missed the vacancy announcement, so it isn’t too farfetched of an idea… Lol

        I know it has been down before albeit for less political reasons Perhaps @Gavi could shed some light on how easy it is. Can judge Wilson announce senior status & judge Abudu simply say she’s moving to Florida? Would there be any interaction with the other two branches for this to happen such as a senate vote or president signing off?

        Like

    • Yea that’s what I figure as well. And CNN reported the talks broke down & currently no more meetings planned. I know the senators need their time off, but this really is a bad time for a week off. Even if they just took Monday off & came in for Tuesday & Wednesday, I think that would look better. And of course, while they were in town, no reason not to confirm a few more judges… Lol

      Like

  29. The defeat of the Delaney nomination opens up the possibility of getting a better (in every regard) nominee for that seat.
    I’m not like some of you folks who assume the occurrence of the best outcome for everything, so I don’t think it’s a foregone conclusion that Elliott or someone more liberal than Delaney will get the nod.

    However, wouldn’t it be great to have the inverse of the failed nomination of Sul Ozerden (5th)?
    When E. Grady Jolly went senior, Trump nominated Ozerden. But the usual blowhards (Cruz and Co.) helped kill his nomination because they weren’t convinced of his commitment to far right Christian nationalism. Which was how we ended up with Cory Wilson, a far more reactionary judge, who just two days ago made it clear that he’s ready to rule against the FDA and women in the mifepristone case.

    Do I dare hope that the NH senators give us a similar feat?

    Like

    • That’s a reasonable hope @Gavi. I don’t think we will get my dream candidate of Gilles Bissonnette but even a Samantha Elliott would be much better than Delaney so I would be fine with that.

      It’s a shame we have to worry at all in blue states, but we know we have to play the cards we are dealt. At this point, as long as the nominee is better than Childs, Pan & Ramirez I will be satisfied because Delaney would have been amongst the bottom four in my book.

      Like

      • It is all about the senators that the state elects. Both of the NH senators are moderate and middle of the road, like the state itself, thus moderate and middle of the road nominees are what gets recommended to Biden. New Hampshire is also a purple state, not a blue state.

        Like

    • That would indeed be nice. Not that the First Circuit is desperately in need, but I agree with the notion that blue states should be sending in liberal nominees to the WH. We have enough compromise picks from the Red/Purple states where negotiation is sometimes a good idea.

      Like

  30. Hey everyone, first time commenter but long-time reader of all your comments lol, I just had a question to pose to all of you judiciary-minded folks here:

    Let’s say that hypothetically towards the end of this year or the beginning of next year, that Justice Clarence Thomas either dies (I wish ill on no one) or resigns for any reason. (I am aware that it’s unlikely due to conservative hacks and FedSoc guys like him refusing to leave under a Democratic administration on their own volition.) But let’s just say that it happens and now Pres. Biden gets his chance to flip a seat and name a second justice to the high court.

    In that scenario, Sen. Sinema in all her sliminess, sees an opportunity to better her chances of re-election by offering a deal to Schumer and Biden. She will vote to confirm whoever Biden nominates in exchange for them denying funding and resources to Ruben Gallego for the Senate race in 2024.

    If you were Schumer/Biden, do you take that deal? Or do you call her bluff and risk her torpedoing the nomination while missing the chance to bring the court back to 5-4 sanity?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Good morning @Dawson & welcome to the blog.

      And WOW, if this is your first time commenting on the blog, you picked a spectacular hypothetical for your first comment. You definitely should comment more often. You sound just like the kind of intellectual mind we love on this blog.

      Now on to your question. It’s rather easy to answer, not because it isn’t a good question (Because it’s a great question), but because of the number one goal. And that goal is when it comes to a SCOTUS vacancy, you fill it at all cost.

      I don’t know if you have seen some of my past comments but I try to be consistent most of the time. I say most of the time because all bets are off when it comes to a Democrat replacing ANY justice, let alone justice Thomas.

      I would enthusiastically support senator Sinema, senator Gillibrand & even governor Hochul’s re-election if that meant Joe Biden got to replace justice Thomas. Anybody that called me out for being inconsistent for happily supporting any of those three for re-election would be 100% right but I would be unapologetic in my inconsistency.

      It comes down to this. There are only nine SCOTUS seats. Let me repeat that. There are only NINE SCOTUS seats. You simply don’t pass up the chance to fill one when given. There’s no guarantee Joe Biden will win re-election. There’s no guarantee the Democrats will hold the majority. But I will guarantee you Justice Allison Nathan would be light years better on the SCOTUS than Clarence Thomas.

      To be completely honest with you, Ruben Gallego could still raise money & win the senate race next year even without party support. If I were Biden, I would sit him down & explain the situation. But I couldn’t pass up the chance to fill Justice Thomas seat. I expect Joe Manchin’s no vote on Nancy Abudu to be repeated many more times between now & the end of next year. Likely the closer to Election Day we get, the less likely Manchin would vote to confirm a SCOTUS nominee. I wouldn’t hang my hat on the hopes of Collins or Murkowski voting for the nominee so it would be full throttle for senator Sinema’s re-election.

      I hope this is not the last time we hear from you on the blog. This was an outstanding question & I look forward to hearing more from you.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Wow! Thank you for such a warm welcome, I greatly appreciate that. I must admit, I’ve read a lot of comments on this forum over the past few months and of course all of the posts, but I rarely focus on who is commenting. I’m much more interested in thoughtful and logical arguments (similar to what a federal judge would have to deal with on a daily basis).

        To give a bit of insight into how I became interested in the judiciary, I remember watching an MSNBC segment after the 2018 midterms which was covering McConnell’s decision to turn the Senate into a FedSoc judge factory. Then I think I watched Vox’s video on a similar topic and overnight I became immersed in judicial affairs. Still bothers my soul that Trump got 10 appointees to the 9th circuit (especially over the explicit objections of the home state senators) and all of that stuff. And don’t even get me started on the missed opportunities to keep the 11th and 5th circuits from going off the deep end (Thanks Leahy -_-)

        To answer my own question, I would HAPPILY endorse Sinema for reelection if it meant getting a Justice Millett or a Justice to the left of Bork lol. I am well aware that I will probably not see a liberal supreme court majority until I’m way older, but I would do anything to at least get back to 5-4 and apply pressure to Roberts to not continue with any overt fuckery while the court bears his name. I would love to get a reliable vote for policy for the next time there is a Democratic majority in the house and President, but I have become a single-issue voter and as long as a senator is a yes vote on something as important as judicial nominations. I hate Sinema for being one of two reasons we didn’t get the full BBB, but if getting her a second term is the reason we don’t have to sit back and receive batsh*t crazy decisions from SCOTUS all the way to the circuit courts, then I’ll swear her in myself lol.

        (Also, I have to admit that I am a HUGE fan of Judge Millett on the D.C. circuit. She is absolutely brilliant and uses her judicial powers to push the Overton window in a legal sense in a more left direction. I am convinced that if RBG stepped down in 2014, she would have given Obama her blessing to nominate Millett, who would’ve undoubtedly carried on her legacy. I would do almost anything to be to hear what her, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Brown-Jackson could do in oral arguments to counteract the pure rank garbage coming from Alito, Kavanaugh, and Scalia with female parts, er, I meant Barrett lol.

        Like

  31. Hi dawsont825, welcome!

    I am of two minds on this.

    On your hypothetical timeline, Manchin might be a problem if it happens next year but not this year. So we’d need his vote to offset Sinema’s.

    I’m more incline to say reject the deal and hope that Susan Collins provide the extra vote needed to offset a possible no from Sinema and Manchin, and use the VP to break any potential tie.

    But also, I am more for long term thinking. And so a lifetime appointment is better than a six year term. Even so, if we accept the Sinema deal, Gallego could still raise tons of money elsewhere and beat her.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. It’s official.
    The toxicity of Amy Coney Barrett killed a state supreme court nomination. Yikes:

    https://ctmirror.org/2023/05/19/sandra-slack-glover-withdraws-ct-supreme-court-nominee/

    But what does this mean for the vacancy? The article says that Gov. Lamont isn’t expected to name a replacement before the state Assembly session ends on June 7. Does this mean that the seat remains open until the assembly returns next year? That would be crazy.

    As Dequan suggested, Lemont should call up the bestest NY governor ever, my favorite governor, and ask her for recommendations on replacements.

    Like

    • @Gavi

      Wait, how is this possible? @Shawnee68 told me the other day we should just sit on our hands because our leaders will do whatever they want. He/She said they don’t have to listen to us. He/She told me worry about our own state only since they got it good in their home state of California. How could this be possible with what he/she said? Same thing with the LaSalle nomination in New York. Same thing with the Delaney nomination in New Hampshire.

      You must be mistaking. The nominee must be getting confirmed & you read wrong because I was specifically told I’m the crazy one for demanding our leaders that we hire & fire do better… Lol

      Like

      • Haha, Shawnee and Frank are our resident old timers who believe in just sitting back and wait for better things to just miraculously happen. Frank, reading this news on his rocking chair on his porch and surveying his lawn with shotgun in hand, must be especially aggrieved over this, being a CT resident. But I am just thrilled.
        If Kansas Governor Laura Kelly can make relatively decent judicial nominations in a ruby red state with Republican legislature, what excuse do blue state govs with Dem legislatures have?

        Let’s look at Oregon. About half or more of the Republicans in the state senate (or is it House?) have or will in coming days be disqualified from holding the seats after the next election, due to their boycott to prevent bills from passing, thanks to a new constitutional amendment approved by voters. They are purposely violating the 10 unexcused absences limit set forth in the constitution hoping that the state courts will strike it down.
        Unpopular though she was, Kate Brown did a great job in filling judicial vacancies, especially on the supreme court. So the Republican challenge should eventually be defeated there. This new governor should continue this tradition and fill the Nelson seat with another great justice.

        Expect the goings-on at state high courts to break into the national media.

        Like

      • @Gavi

        I wasn’t even aware of the Oregon situation (Other then the Nelson vacancy of course). Interesting. It almost seems as if sitting on the couch doing nothing is the wrong approach.

        I wonder should we listen to @Shawnee68 & @Frank & not even give Florida a glance anymore instead of putting up a fight in a state the Democrats nominees for governor & US senator lost by less then 50,000 votes just 5 years ago. And at the very least force Republicans to spend money in the expensive state to divert funds from other states.

        I’m starting to rethink everything else they have been calling me crazy for now. Could it be we don’t have all this time they have been claiming to fill most of the existing judicial vacancies. I was comforted in their words of wisdom repeatedly telling me there is plenty of time but after them being wrong on so many other issues over the past couple months, I’m starting to second guess any advice they give at this point… Lol

        Like

      • Regarding FL, when has it ever worked to spend a bunch of money in a completely lost state? Look at the population trends FL has seen, not what happened over 5 years ago. Since 5 years ago hoards of conservatives have flocked to the state looking to escape COVID lockdowns, making it a conservative bastion for decades to come. As such, RDS won by 20 points, and that is conveniently ignored by you and Gavi since it doesn’t fit your blind vision that FL is a swing state. It was when Obama was president, but those days are long gone. While you accuse me of living in the past, both of you are living in the past on FL. Lastly, everyone here has been wrong before on stuff, including myself. If you choose to ignore me because I’ve gotten some stuff wrong, that is your decision.

        Like

      • @Frank

        Ok, no reason to live in the past. How about last Tuesday, is that recent enough for you? Our states biggest city just elected a Democrat mayor which out of the past three decades has had a Republican mayor for all but four years. You know why? Because Democrats invested time & money into the race. The Republican wasn’t even a very flawed candidate. You see what can happen when you invest in a race?

        As for @Dawson’s hypothetical, you wouldn’t accept the deal? So you would risk letting 1/9 of the SCOTUS go unfilled until there’s a president DeSantis or Trump? Haaaaaaaa… No way

        As for New Hampshire, that one you’re unfortunately correct on. I am hoping the replacement pick will be to Delaney’s left not so much so because of the senators but more so because of their fear of a second embarrassment. Perhaps they can be embarrassed into a good pick similar to Hochul.

        Like

      • True, but Jacksonville is pretty much the only part of the state that has moved to the left in the past 5 years. The rest of the state has gone in the exact opposite direction and there are no signs that the demographics are getting any better for the Democrats.

        Like

      • Jacksonville is more DeSantis country than many parts of the state. The state is still purple. It’s red when Democrats don’t invest in the state like they haven’t in the past 5 years. It will become even more purple as DeSantis signs more unpopular laws. It would be a mistake to write the state off. Democrats can win the presidency without Florida but Republicans can’t. The state as well as Texas should be contested.

        Like

      • @Frank

        I’ve pointed out this tendency of yours before and I will point it out now. You have a habit of making assertions, then when those assertions are refuted by evidence, you move the goalposts. This doesn’t count, that doesn’t count.
        If a non-controversial Republican running in DeSantis country with his endorsement cannot win, well, let’s just shift the premise to say Jacksonville doesn’t count.
        If after claiming that Dems don’t have a comparable organization like Fed Soc, let’s say the ACS doesn’t count.
        If claiming that a junior senator will always defer to the senior senator of their own party on judicial nominations, let’s say Harris/Feinstein and, how could we forget, Paul/McConnell don’t count.

        —

        Here’s a era you should be more familiar with.
        During and immediately after Jim Crow in the south, the 15 former Confederacy states (11) and aligned border states (~4) were solidly Democratic. So much so that variations of the phrase “primary tantamount to general election” came into our political lexicon. Did the Republicans throw up their hands? No. They took a great many beating. And guess what, sometimes they won!

        Phew! I just barely escaped the 50s with my life. Back to more recent history.

        Chris Christie won reelection by 22%. Which is more impressive and signifying that the losing party need not compete? Winning by 20% in a supposedly deep red state? Or winning by 22% in a blue state?

        But what does any of this matter when you’ll again just try to move the goalpost.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Haaaaaaa

        @Gavi

        There you go making sense & using facts & evidence again. Don’t you know it’s much easier living in a world where you just say whatever you want & then once you’re proven wrong you just say something different also without evidence. That’s the much easier route to take then all of this evidence & facts… Lol

        Like

      • Duval county voted for Biden in 2020, so it’s not like it’s a Republican bastion the way it used to be.
        When Biden nominates more than half of his judicial nominees from the ACS the way Trump did with the FedSoc, then I’ll agree that they are comparable. As it currently stands, that is nowhere near the case with the ACS and Biden.
        Of course there are a very select few instances of a junior senator stepping over the senior senator, but those typically are unique circumstances wherein either the senator in question is a maverick like Paul or trying to appeal to the left in running for president like Harris.
        I’m not as familiar with the 50s as you assume I am, but from my understanding that was a situation where the Democratic Party moved heavily to the left on the civil rights issue, ceding the whites completely over to the Republican Party. I’m not seeing the similarities between that (or Chris Christie, who was elected as a moderate and middle of the road governor) and Florida today, unless you are agreeing with me that the Democrats being pro-lockdown made it so Florida became much more Republican during COVID-19.

        Like

      • @dawsont825

        When Obama nominated Patricia Millett, I believe she had the most SCOTUS arguments of any female attorney in history at the time. She is eminently qualified. But as @Shawnee68 mentioned, age is super important to myself & many of the bloggers here so I would have to disagree on her being elevated. And even if I had to advise Biden on an over 55 judge, I would pick Robert Wilkins (My personal favorite Obama circuit court judge out of his 55). He’s more progressive than Millett as well. That’s just my personal opinion. @Shawnee68 calls it agism. I call it common sense when you’re talking about lifetime appointments to take age into consideration.

        @Frank

        A couple things. You trying to have it both ways. You say “ Duval county voted for Biden in 2020” but then tell me & @Gavi we can’t go back in time for our arguments. Which one is it? Act of the matter is if we are looking at recent history (As you say we can only do), Duval County voted overwhelmingly for DeSantis in the last election. You know, the election that was held 194 days ago. So using your recent history only logic, the Republican nominee should have mopped the floor with the Democrat.

        As for the 500,000 voter advantage the Republicans now has, the Democrats had over a 400,000 advantage when GW Bush won the state in 2000. They also had the same in 2004 when he won the state again. It was around a 200,000 Democrat advantage when Trump won it in 2016. I’m sure if you go to Kentucky & Louisiana, Republicans probably have a massive voter registration advantage yet both states have Democrat governors.

        Voter registration doesn’t mean everybody is going to vote. You have to turn your voters out. Democrats doing what you’re suggesting will do the exact opposite. That’s why you contest in states during elections. To convince your voters, Independents & maybe even a few of those 500,000 voter registration advantage voters to vote for you.

        Like

      • Apologies, I accidentally pressed send. Of course voter registration doesn’t mean everything, but these are new residents, not ancestral members of the party. The fact that the Democrats couldn’t win when they had a voter registration advantage doesn’t exactly bode well to winning when new residents are registering with the Republicans at such a wide level.

        Like

      • Oh ok no worries. While we don’t always agree, I was a little surprised you responded without addressing my post because you usually have thoughtful arguments. I too have been guilty of pressing send too quickly… Haaaaaa

        As to your second s risk response, yes I get it on the numbers. But that still doesn’t explain how Republicans win 3 presidential elections in the state of Florida over the past 23 years with similar deficits. Are you suggesting only Republicans can win in the state of Florida with a 400,000 deficit? Are Democrats not capable of doing the same with a the reverse numbers?

        Like

      • Haaaaaa… Where are you getting that data from? I live in Florida & never heard that. And as for South Carolina in 2020, Democrats won the senate that year. Again just because Democrats spend money on a race & lose doesn’t mean they wasted the resources. Them spending in a race means Republicans likely have to respond in kind.

        We don’t know if them not spending money in a race could allow Republicans to spend more in a race Democrats barely one somewhere else. You can’t concede any part of the country.

        Like

      • And I don’t think Biden spent much in West Virginia. In both cases the states went overwhelmingly for one party for the past few decades in presidential elections. That’s not the case for Florida. It voted for a Democrat twice when Joe Biden was Vice President.

        If it continues double digit wins for Republicans for another faxes then we can cross that bridge when we get to it. But that’s not the case. It was a lie out in one off year election. That’s hardly a reason to concede the state with the third most electoral college votes.

        Like

      • I know it’s hard to hear but dude your state is a shyt show.There’s no incentive for Biden to do more than put on a show there. It’s too conservative there.

        I think Obama won Ohio in 2008 but do you think Democrat’s expect to carry that state in 2024.? Of course not . It’s a waste of time and resources.

        Liked by 1 person

      • My state being a shit show is the exact reason why Biden should compete here. If Florida woman, Blacks, LGBT & many Hispanics who have immigrant families & friends that can no longer work & are scared to leave their house are angry at DeSantis policies, why should Democrats not court those voters? Your argument for not competing here is my exact argument for competing here.

        Like

      • Biden doesn’t need Florida to win but Republicans do. There’s no realistic math for Republicans to win the presidency without Florida. So that’s even more incentive to fight them here. And here spending doesn’t mean you can’t spend in North Carolina. Biden doesn’t have a serious primary challenger. He will have plenty of money to do both. If a sitting president with no primary challenger doesn’t have money to campaign with then he ain’t winning regardless.

        Like

      • The GOP has to to unseat Biden not the other way around. A sitting President in this country is gifted with a second term. The only exceptions are if so something goes really wrong like Covid for TRump.

        The template is there for Biden all he has to do is hold the has won before or exchange a state or two. That’s why I prefer Biden over someone who is an outsider.

        Being an incumbent has it’s advantages.

        Like

      • I agree with everything you said. I just disagree it’s a reason NOT to compete in Florida. It further reinforces why he should go in the attack in Florida. And keep in mind that doesn’t just mean the presidency. Biden competing will also help down ballot races too. Maybe it can help pick off one or two House races.

        Like

      • Of course they are not going to advertise that they won’t be campaigning in Florida. However, it costs more money to to compete there and they won without it last time.

        The Democrats would be better off spending more time and resources in North Carolina. There’s an opening there. It’s okay to spend time in Florida but not much point in wasting too much time and effort there.

        What’s easier North Carolina or Florida?

        Like

  33. Welcome Dawson. I think I’m that scenario I’d view balancing the court as the absolute number one priority above all. I would definitely back Sinema and enthusiastically so. Not only that I’d go a step further and offer to make her friend Roopali Desai the nominee.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Appreciate the hospitality! That is honestly something I did not think of; great idea. I don’t think the nominee being someone she recommended for the 9th circuit increases her chance of voting for him/her, I think she’d vote for anyone Biden nominates. Hell, she voted for Abudu, Mathis, and every other nominee without any mental reservation. I think she would only care about her chances of getting reelected and her personal career outlook. And I could easily give that to her in exchange for her being a rubber stamp for all judicial nominees.

      I’m too lazy to look up her voting record when she became a senator during Trump’s last two years, but did she vote to confirm many of his lower court nominees? I know there was a small group of Dem senators that voted to confirm Trump’s picks similar to what Graham is doing nowadays (Heitkamp, McCaskill, Donnelly, Manchin, and I think Coons)

      Like

  34. While the Barrett letter did play a part in the defeat of the Sandra Slack Glover’s nomination to the CT Supreme Court, a bigger issue was the fact her entire history is in federal courts and none in CT ones and she had no experience at all as a judge.
    That proved to be the greater hurdle she just couldn’t overcome.
    I will say this though, I have no issues with it being made clear that yes, praising people who are parts of groups who are intent on taking civil rights away from others and saying they’ll be fine judges because they’re nice to you at cocktails parties or you clerked alongside them will say a lot about your judgement and nothing good IMO.

    Like

    • And the best way to prevent a repeat of that happening is to appoint young progressives. A proven progressive wouldn’t have signed that letter of support for ACB & if they are younger they likely won’t have a long career of working with conservatives. So you solve two problems in one by taking my advice. Of course the nominee needs to be qualified. Brad Garcia isa great example of that.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s