The daughter of former federal judge James Munley, Julia K. Munley is poised to fill her father’s old seat on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Background
The 57 year old Munley was born into a storied Pennsylvania family, with her great-grandfather, grandfather, and grandmother having served in the Pennsylvania General Assembly as Democrats. Munley attended Marywood University in Scranton, receiving a B.A. degree in 1987, and subsequently getting a law degree from Penn State Dickinson Law in 1992.
After graduating, Munley clerked for Judge Stephen McEwen with the Pennsylvania Superior Court and then joined Masterson, Braunfield, Maguire & Brown as an Associate. In 1995, Munley switched to Mazzoni & Karam, and in 2001, became a partner at Munley Law.
In 2016, Governor Tom Wolf appointed Munley to the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, where she currently serves.
History of the Seat
The seat Munley has been nominated for opened on September 30, 2022, with the move to senior status of Judge Robert Mariani. Mariani, in turn, replaced Munley’s father, Judge James Munley, in 2011.
Legal Experience
While she has shifted firms on occasion, Munley spent the first twenty five years of her career in private practice, practicing in state and federal court. Notably, Munley argued before the Third Circuit (with a panel including then-Judge Samuel Alito) on behalf of Wayne Stevens, who was accused of sexual harassment and won a four-day jury trial. See Johnson v. Elk Lake Sch. Dist., 283 F.3d 138 (3d Cir. 2002). The Third Circuit unanimously upheld the district court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. See id. Munley also represented numerous Allstate agents in a suit against the insurance company alleging improper termination. See Romero v. Allstate Ins. Co., (E.D. Pa. July 6, 2016).
On the state court side, Munley has handled civil claims, including insurance litigation. See, e.g., Md. Casualty Co. v. McGrath, No. 355 MDA 2015 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
Judicial Experience
From 2016, Munley has served as a Judge on the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, which are the primary trial courts in Pennsylvania. As a judge, Munley presided over cases in civil and criminal matters, as well as domestic relations, juvenile, and family law matters. A number of Munley’s rulings in family law matters have been appealed to the Pennsylvania Superior Court, which has affirmed. See, e.g., In the Interest of MM-A, No. 928 MDA 2017 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017); Jablonowski v. Jablonowski, No. 1481 MDA 2018 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019); B.V. v. J.W., No. 746 MDA 2020 (Pa. Super. 2020); Jones v. Jones, No. 1647 MDA 2021 (Pa. Super. 2022).
In a notable opinion, Munley held that a plaintiff corporation could sue in Pennsylvania state court without registering with the state as it had sufficient activity within the state. See SMS Financial Ch., LLC v. Bolus Truck Parts & Towing, Inc., No. 542 MDA 2022 (Pa. Super. 2022). The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed Munley’s ruling, finding it to be “detailed and well-reasoned” and that it “accurately and thoroughly disposes of the standing issue.” See id.
Political Activity
Munley has donated extensively throughout her political career until her ascension to the bench. Her donations are exclusively to Democrats, including Wolf, President Biden, and former Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Overall Assessment
Munley is the first Pennsylvania nominee, since Senator Eastland made the blue slip a home-state veto, who would not need a blue slip from a Republican senator to reach the bench. That being said, her extensive home state contacts and legal experience, alongside her relative lack of controversy makes her a consensus nominee.
The Vetting Room 
I hope Biden respectfully hears all their complaints and then sticks to his original nominations. They are good picks.
Unless you’re going to break the blue slip tradition, letting House members make all the nominations is just going to result in more seats left unfilled. And that doesn’t help anyone or do anything to defend Civil Rights.
LikeLike
@Joe
I agree. Unless Durbin is going to scrap or at the very least amend blue slips, then there is no reason to give anything more than a courtesy meeting to hear their complaints. It’s bad that Louisiana is the state that triggered this because I believe Kennedy & Cassidy have worked in good faith. For that reason alone, even if I got 100% of what I wanted & blue slips were totally scrapped, I would probably keep these two nominees.
LikeLike
I’m happy to see my former governor Charlie Crist get a position. He still to this day is the only Republican I have voted for in any statewide election when he first ran for governor before switching parties.
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/07/president-biden-announces-key-nominees-49/)
LikeLike
Cassidy announced his supporting of the two nominees from today: https://www.cassidy.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/cassidy-releases-statement-on-judicial-nominees-for-louisiana-federal-courts
LikeLike
Sorry, I meant to respond to Dequan and Frank as a stand-alone comment, reposted here:
Ha!
“Biden may listen to their request after looking at those names.”
Dequan, I would eat my head if Biden backtracks by withdrawing the nominations because of this letter. And I would eat it without ketchup, too.
It took Rand Paul for Biden to not go forward with the Chad Meredith nomination; it will take the LA senators’ non-return of blue slips for this to have a similar ending. And these nominees are light years away from being a Meredith-type.
@Frank
That is incorrect. While there’s a long tradition of home state senators playing a role in judicial nomination for their state, it is not unusual for others to have a role, especially when the senators are of a different party than the president.
CRS noted: “Although Members of the U.S. House of Representatives do not have a formal constitutional role in the confirmation of federal judges, the demographic characteristics of judicial nominees are also of interest to Members of the House.”
And:
“Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, “Nomination of Miguel Estrada,” Remarks in the House, Congressional Record, daily edition, February 13, 2003, p. H685 (stating that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus “will actively work to identify and recommend qualified Hispanic candidates to fill Federal court vacancies”). Additionally, in 2014, the Congressional Black Caucus released a letter to urge President Obama to appoint a greater number of African American judges, particularly to certain judicial districts (e.g., the three judicial districts located in Alabama).”
Starkly: Rep. John W. Flannagan, a New Deal Dem, recommended judicial nominees to FDR over the objections of Virginia’s two DEM senators.
Jimmy Carter’s judicial nomination commission had members selected by home state senators AND congressmen.
For my own state, during the Bush presidency, GWB got his recommendations from Republican Governor George Pataki.
And of course, Kentucky’s Dem gov. Beshear was very vocal in his opposition of Meredith last year.
Delegate Norton, a member of the House and decidedly not a senator, handles district court vacancy recommendations for DC.
Florida’s Dem House members had their own commission to recommend nominees for Obama.
Abdul Kallon was recommended by Alabama Dem Rep Artur Davis.
The Tennessean reported that during the 111th Congress, Democrats from the Tennessee House delegation provided recommendations to the Obama White House for filling a vacancy on the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. Even if he doesn’t always go with their recommendations.
Not to mention Clyburn for SC.
In ND, we see that the state’s Dem Party has taken the lead on filling vacancies in that state.
Just wanted to give a flavor of the various parties who get to “recommend” nominees, even if they don’t have a formal role in the confirmation precess.
I am sure you’ll have many exceptions to make. While you think of them, I suggest you buy this useful book, it’ll save us time:
Picking Federal Judges
by Sheldon Goldman
LikeLike
Of course house members can make suggestions, but that doesn’t mean Biden has to listen to them.
LikeLike
This isn’t what you said earlier.
Anyone can make suggestions. A president doesn’t have to listen to them, not even suggestions from the home state senators.
LikeLike
I meant more in terms of suggestions that must be listened to based on a long-standing norm
LikeLike
Actually, they do (or at the very least, all that matters is Biden thinks he has to). It’s a norm known as the blue slip.
LikeLike
@Gavi
Oh I didn’t in any way mean Biden would withdraw the nominees because of the names on the letter. I was more so talking about perhaps he would change his stance on blue slips. Even that is a stretch but that is what I was referring to.
I will reiterate what I said a couple months ago. I personally want blue slips gone but I doubt it will happen because the leader of the party is an institutionalist & hasn’t pushed for them to be scrapped. But if that were to ever change, it is likely to be because of pressure from some of the 9 names on the letter today.
LikeLike
Biden is the last person to fight blue slips. He was chair of SJC for years. It’s not gonna happen!
LikeLike
Well yea, that’s why I said it’s a stretch even for Biden to endorse ditching blue slips. But if there is any chance whatsoever, I do believe it would be because of pressure from people who signed the letter today.
LikeLike
Not only is Biden opposed to the removal of blue slips for the district courts, but many of the Democratic judiciary committee members (including Durbin) have expressed a desire to return to blue slips on the circuit courts at some point in the future. While he hasn’t said it, I’d suspect Biden would like to see that as well (especially seeing how the new WHC is handling things).
LikeLike
@Frank
Only in your hottest fever dream is that return to blue slip for COA a possibility. Even if a couple Dem senators express such a desire, that’s just lip service they are paying to a world long gone.
I would make a claim that the first Dem senator who actually puts forth a serious proposal to return to those blue slips will be run out of office.
History, of which you should be more familiar than all of us, suggests that these things only go in one direction and almost never in reverse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gavi, I’m not saying that the Democrats should go that route, but the current set that the voters have elected are mostly of the traditional variety, so it shouldn’t be shocking if it does happen. I also highly doubt voters would punish them since the vast majority of them have no idea what a blue slip is and for the most part care little about the judiciary. Even the overturning of Roe v. Wade hasn’t shifted the attitude of voters as much as I thought it might.
LikeLike
I’m interested in finding out more about Philip Hadji. He has an interesting background. It doesn’t sound like he’ll be difficult to confirm.
LikeLike
I too thought Philip Hadji seemed to be an interesting choice. I couldn’t find much that would lead me to see why he was picked for that court. I have noticed an uptick in nominees with a military background from this new WHC office.
Perhaps they are looking to increase veteran representation which is a good thing. I just don’t like to see it done at the expense of more progressive candidates. For this court it’s fine since it isn’t a lifetime appointment. But it does sting a little in cases like Jeremy Daniels when he’s picked over two more progressive choices.
LikeLike
Irma Ramirez voted into the floor via voice vote with senator Hawley being recorded as a no. Hopefully she can be the first circuit court nominee to get a voice vote in almost a decade so not to waste floor time but probably not.
de Alba got no Republican votes so she passed 11-10. Graham said he voted for her for the district court but can’t support her now for the circuit because she took an ankle bracelet off of a defendant. That case was talked about at length during her hearing. The defendant had two ankle bracelets & she left the other one on him.
LikeLike
At the very least, Ramirez should be able to skip the cloture vote and go right to a final floor vote. I wonder if Senators Markey, Warren, Sanders, and a couple others will vote NO?
LikeLike
I am very thankful that we have an outright majority on SJC (and had full attendance today). Would’ve hated to see de Alba held up.
Hopefully we see some movement on Ramirez as soon as next week. No point in wasting time considering she should have broad support.
LikeLike
Looks like Hernan Vera and Casey Pitts are set for confirmation votes Monday or Tuesday. Good to see.
Hopefully Schumer sets up a vote for Ho for next week. He probably will want to wait until Monday to make sure attendance isn’t an issue again.
LikeLike
I’m VERY happy to see Vera teed up. He’s the Biden nominee that has waited the longest for a vote. I actually think he will end up getting at least one Republican vote.
I love Pitts but wished they would have teed Lin up first because I always want judges confirmed in order of age so you maximize the Chief Justices by Democrat appointees in the future. I guess the NDCA isn’t as important since all judges are Democrat appointees but still wish they would confirm them in order of age.
I’m not happy at all to see the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers or the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy teed up. Next week is one of the two full weeks the senate is in session before September. If there was ANY week to just focus on judges, next week should have been it.
LikeLike
There are plenty of judges in San Francisco. I believe Pitts is headed to San Jose which has a vacancy since Koh left for 9th Circuit.
LikeLike
Hey all, new here, did anyone see the judges recommended in Wisconsin?
LikeLike
@Judiciary-Nerd
Welcome to the blog. Please feel free to add your thoughts.
@Mitch
Both seem decent for a purple state where blue slips are in play. Neither is overtly more progressive than the other so I hope they go with youth since there is an age difference.
LikeLike
Yes. They each seem pretty uncontroversial.
LikeLike
Seeing on Twitter that Baldwin and Johnson’s committee has forwarded two new names for the ED Wisconsin vacancy.
Byron Browning Conway
Marc Aaron Hammer
LikeLike
Yeah, I’m so done defending Chuck.
Another week with 51/49 vote balance wasted and ONE term limited judge, just get out of here with this lazy bull.
LikeLike
What do you want him to do exactly? People here can complain all they want, but I haven’t seen a realistic plan as for what he should be doing instead.
LikeLike
As for what isn’t realistic, working on Fridays regularly isn’t on the table, nor is having more than one vote on Monday. This is due to the senators wanting to travel home on the weekend.
LikeLike
@Frank
Schumer could use the threat of working on the weekends to get more consent. For instance, just two weeks ago many were predicting the debt ceiling votes would go into that Friday & possibly Saturday. They finished Thursday night.
There was I believe 11 amendment votes yet they finished Thursday night. When you threaten to have votes on Friday & Saturday then working until Thursday night doesn’t sound so bad. I’m not saying that needs to be done every week but even if you do that once a month, you can get two more district court judges confirmed each month. So Schumer most certainly can use the threat of working weekends more often to get more done.
LikeLike
Didn’t Schumer already threaten weekend votes in 2021 and after the Republicans called his bluff, never did so, at least for federal judges, save for that deal right before Christmas 2021 where cloture votes were not used for several district court nominees so everyone could go home? You make a fair point, but the debt ceiling affects the economy, while confirming federal judges doesn’t, or at least not directly. Advocating for a different candidate is a much different animal than for scheduling weekend votes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dequan, remember Frank is a holdover of a different political era, when you just sit back and let things happen to you and hope for the best.
Today’s emphasis on advocacy, no matter the outcome, is an anathema to the vestigial Eisenhowerians.
LikeLike
The worst thing about that thinking is we have seen in RECENT history that advocacy works. Need I not remind @Frank that we would have NY Court of Appeals Justice Hector LaSalle without advocacy. I’d venture to say we would have SCOTUS Childs instead of KBJ without advocacy.
LikeLike
No, no, no. Don’t you know those are the exceptions to my otherwise perfectly formulated, always wrong, thinking?
LikeLike
Haaaaaaaa… Gotta love moving the goal post just as the other team lines up on the two yard line… Lol
LikeLike
That’s nonsense. You have to delusional if think Biden was going to select Michelle Childs and you were the reason why he didn’t. Give me a break!
LikeLike
Would you like to be hundreds of miles away from your family and/or traveling every weekend or spending time with them?
LikeLike
Ahhh, now we’ve entered the Shawnee realm of false analogies.
Shawnee has her “would you like to have the same job and car for 10 years.”
Now Frank has his “would you like to be away from your family to do a job you personally signed up to do, spent many days and weekends on end away from them while campaigning, leave them to go on trips to go schmooze donors, but is now expected to do this hard-won job in DC.”
Like Shawnee’s convenient about-face this week, I expect Frank to change his tune at the earliest convenience. And I will be ready and waiting with this quote when he does.
In the meantime, I am happy to hold my US senators to account to do the job they begged me to vote for them to allow them to do. Others can enjoy the quite life on their rocking chair, eating their Jell-O.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You can mis-describe what I have said all you want but I responded to you already. You accuse me of doing what of what you just did.
There’s nothing wrong with having a family and working. You have a problem with that? Do you spend Thanksgiving and Christmas alone? Or do you work on those days?
We want people with families to represent us so they can relate to our needs.
How did you get here? Someone had to take time off of work to take care of you. Our nation’s policies are set up to support people with families. You HAVE one .
We’ll see how far Tim Scott will get as a single man running for President. How can someone like him lecture women on their reproductive rights when he hasn’t been in a relationship. The man is over 50. At times @Gavi you remind me of him.
LikeLike
Frank- They are not at that stage in their lives. We saw what happened with Fetterman. He was devastated not seeing his family everyday. It’s tough to only be around your family only on weekend’s. You are missing out.
LikeLike
@Frank
No, I wouldn’t want to be away from my family all weekend. That’s why I didn’t run for a job in which only 100 people get to represent over 330 million people. They work 3 days a week & increasingly only 2 days a week.
Now if you ask me, I don’t think Russ Feingold & others would be calling to cancel some of the Sumer recess if they just stuck with the last two years schedule of working 3 days a week. But as we saw last week, when you only work 2 days a week, almost nothing gets done. So that creates the backlog we have today.
We have 3 district court nominees that have were nominated in 2021. We have one circuit court nominee that has been pending over a year with another coming up on a year in another month & a half. Mitch McConnell would be hard pressed to make nominees from a Democrat president wait that long. It’s not fair to the nominees & more importantly it’s not fair to the citizens that their cases have to wait longer & they stand a better chance of getting a Republican appointed judge in the process. Look at the Trump indictment case. Judge Canon was picked again. Of course there are 3 vacancies on that court that if Biden had already filled them, it would have been much less likely her name would have randomly been selected.
LikeLike
You keep saying that the Senate only works 3 days a week. There is more to the job than just voting on the floor. I think you know that. Let’s try to better at being honest.
The nominees know what they were in for when they applied for the positions. It appears that you have more of a problem than they do.
Yes, Judge Cannon appears to be possibly presiding at the Trump trial. It’s not set yet. However, she was reversed twice by the 11th Circuit.
If the the DOJ doesn’t want her they can ask for another judge.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth I do think Feingolds advocacy will mostly end up being moot, as most pending nominees should be confirmed prior to the August recess. However, that’s mainly due to lack of nominees from the White House and three missed hearing slots this year.
We will get at least two this week with the possibility of a couple more. After Vera and Pitts there are only 4 appellate and 17 district nominees outstanding. Even in the 2.5 day weeks it would be easy to get 4-5 district nominees confirmed.
We should hopefully get a clearer picture on Monday though. Personally I am hoping Schumer defiles for Ho and sets up a Wednesday vote and then sets up an appellate vote for Thursday.
LikeLike
@Joe
I agree even with a 2-day work week (Sorry I can’t give a half day for one vote on the first day back… Lol), they could confirm most judicial nominees. The problem is by my last count, there are 31 non judicial, non-Department of State & Department of Defense (Both usually get voice votes) nominees left. Schumer seems to be equally focused on non-judicial nominees as he is judges.
Last week he confirmed 2 non judges & has already teed up 2 for next week. So my worry is Schumer is still aiming for the low hanging fruit. That, more than the calendar itself is my second biggest worry after getting another true batch of nominees.
LikeLike
I should clarify, that this will only happen if there is focus on confirming judicial nominees. If they mix in 2-3 undersecretaries or board members a week then it’ll be difficult. But the opportunity is there if there is focus.
LikeLike
I think we will see some non-judicial nominees confirmed over the next few weeks, so I doubt all of the current nominees out of committee will receive a vote before the summer recess. Just because they are voting on those other nominees doesn’t mean there isn’t focus, it simply means that the Senate has different priorities than people commenting on this blog.
LikeLike
@shawnee68
President Biden interviewed three people for the SCOTUS. Childs was one of the three so yes, I think he was considering her. If not, he would have interviewed just KBJ & justice Kruger.
And yes, I know the senators do other things besides voting. The problem is the other things do not confirm judges. So yes, I think they need to spend more than 3 & increasingly 2 days a week voting, which is the only thing that confirms judges.
Also, I know any decision by judge Cannon can be appealed to the 11th circuit. The problem is that takes time. We want the decision before the election next year. Her being the judge increases the case itself will be delayed, let alone a likely appeal.
LikeLike
Not true. It was an open secret that KBJ was going to be chosen. She had already passed a background for the DC Circuit. She was a public defender which Biden had preferred.
To say that just because Child’s received an interview that she was being seriously considered is untrue. That interview was done as favor to Clyburn , Graham and Scott.
The possibility of Child’s being selected were slim and none.
LikeLike
@shawnee68
Haaaaaaaaaa… An “open secret”? Damn, you got a bat phone to The Resolute Desk? Biden interviews three people out of over twenty in his list. Childs very much could have been the nominee.
You have no more information than anybody else on this blog to suggest otherwise unless you’re telling us you have inside information (Which you’re not). Yes KBJ was the front runner but plenty of times the front runner was not the person selected & this very much could have been the case of Clyburn had pushed harder & advocacy groups hadn’t pushed so hard for Jackson.
LikeLike
Yes, when Biden said in South Carolina that he would select a black woman for the Supreme Court eyes were on KBJ. Did anyone at that time think it was Michelle Childs? Of course not.
I wanted Leondra Kruger to be chosen but it was well known here that KBJ was the preferred candidate.
There was no way an obscure district court judge from South Carolina was going to be chosen.
They had to interview other people in case something went wrong but there’s no reporting out there that suggests that Child’s being nominated was a possibility.
LikeLike
Haaaaaaaa… I keep on reading you say everybody knew. I remember right here on this bout the very real fear Childs was going to be picked. You’re just plain wrong. Childs was very much in the mix which is why you can’t send any verified credible article that backs up what you’re saying. I can send you several articles that shows Childs was credibly considered.
LikeLike
It’s just common sense which isn’t common here. When KBJ was nominated for DC Circuit what were people saying? Were they talking about Michelle Child’s?
No one had heard about Michelle Child’s until KBJ was confirmed to DC Circuit.
The left is paranoid because they perceive her as a “conservative.” This is a term that is used to smear black judges hailing from red states.
I am still waiting for someone to post a decision while on the DC Circuit that is “conservative.” It’s not true these so called “progressives” lie like the hard right GOP does. They are one of the same.
LikeLike
It’s just common sense which isn’t here… I see what else isn’t here, PROOF to back up one single solitaire word of what you’re saying. I guess all the articles I can actually send you showing Childs was credibly considered doesn’t hold a candle to you saying you heard she wasn’t… Haaaaaa
Now one thing I will agree with you on is the left saying she is conservative. Let me be clear, while I know some have said that, her being conservative wasn’t the reason I gave for her being the worst SCOTUS pick from any Democrat president in my lifetime had she been chosen. My beef was there were much younger & more progress choices. That’s it, point blank. Same for why she was Biden’s worst circuit court pick until Ramirez came along.
LikeLike
Yes, they did background and gave an interview but there was no way she going to be picked.
I could say that Sidney Thomas was going to be picked because he had a background and an interview.
I thought you were smart enough to know that Biden wanted to create the perception that they hadn’t made up their mind when they knew it would be KBJ. That’s politics.
LikeLike
Awesome. Now can you send me even just ONE article that backs up even a word of what you say? I’m sure you have plenty but just one will be good enough. If you need more time don’t worry, I’ll wait… Lol
Below are just some of the articles backing up my version if events. Once you send me your evidence & articles, I will call the New York Times, Bloomberg Law, AP News & others to have them retract what they wrote because @Shanee68 has evidence to the contrary. Go ahead & send away. We’re all waiting & counting in you…lol
(https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/us/politics/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court.html)
(https://www.metro.us/biden-considers-judge-childs/)
(https://apnews.com/article/stephen-breyer-supreme-court-leading-candidates-55b50413244dfa90c87c6d437b5d178e)
(https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/state-court-experience-would-make-childs-a-rarity-at-high-court-1)
LikeLike
What you posted doesn’t advance what your position that Child’s would be selected. In fact, it shows the opposite.
The folks on the extreme left (cancel culture club) were offended that Child’s was even interviewed. It was just a favor to friend and nothing more.
I can’t think of a Supreme Court nominee who was just chosen without anyone else being looked at. It’s better strategy to create an element of surprise.
In retrospect it’s obvious from KBJ’s background i.e former public defender and a brother and uncle in law enforcement. KBJ was a more logical choice and they knew her. Why wasn’t Child’s nominated for DC Circuit before KBJ?
I personally would have preferred Leondra Kruger but she refused the Solicitor General job twice. You don’t have to be arguing cases before the Supreme Court to serve there but Kruger had both federal and state experience. She also has diversity in terms of being from California. The most populated state doesn’t have one person. That’s not right.
LikeLike
@shanee68
How does me seeing articles from reputable verified news sources saying Childs was one of three women being heavily considered for the SCOTUS not advance what my position that Child’s would be selected? You have not sent me ONE article backing up what you’re saying, which is she was not seriously considered. I’ve sent you about four that says she was.
You can’t say I am sending articles that show the opposite of my point when my point is Childs was heavily considered & all the articles I sent says she was heavily considered. Can you reply with four sources that says she wasn’t heavily considered? How about three, or two. I’ll make it easy for you. How about my four sources that I sent to back up what I am saying for just ONE source from you to back up what your saying… Lol
LikeLike
You can use adverbs like “heavily” all you want. KBJ was the front-runner from beginning to end.
There were only a few people who knew who the nominee would be . That would be Ron Klein and Joe Biden. Neither of those two men were cited in your articles. Yes, they did a background check and an interview but it wasn’t going to happy unless something went wrong with KBJ.
Like I said before KBJ was chosen for the DC Circuit before Child’s. The Whitehouse knew that an opening would happen and aligned KBJ to fill the vacancy.
I they did the Biden team did a good job of leaking to the press that others including Child’s were possible nominees. It was tactic to keep heat off of KBJ so that she could have smooth sailing.
It never goes well when an administration tries to hand pick a single nominee without looking at others. This kind of happened when Bush chose Harriet Miers. He did not ask any Republican on SJC what her confirmation prospects would be.
In his heart of hearts Biden wanted someone who was a public defender. That is what he got.
LikeLike
Ron Klein and Joe Biden were not cited in any of my articles but you still haven’t provided ANY articles at all. So I guess we have to go on the word of The NY Times, AP, Politico, & about a dozen more news sources or we can go on what you say with no evidence whatsoever to back it up… Lol
LikeLike
Child’s got an interview. Just because you get an interview doesn’t mean you will get the job.
So, what are you trying to prove? The fact is that Child’s wasn’t nominated. How can you say she was going to be when she wasn’t. Go to bed!
LikeLike
I guess if I’m staying up waiting on you to send the very first article or shred of evidence to back up what you’re saying I mine as well go to bed. I’ve sent you multiple verifiable sources to back up what I said. Two weeks later & you still haven’t sent the first Post-It note with anything to back up what you’re saying. So yea, I guess I mine as well go to sleep & hope week 3 you send some evidence… Lmao
LikeLike
None of the articles you cited said Child’s was going to be chosen. My proof is that she wasn’t. It’s case closed. lol
LikeLike
Nice try moving the goal post but not gonna fly. You said she wasn’t “seriously considered”. The disagreement was not she wasn’t chosen. Obviously she wasn’t selected. Come on, you gotta try that trick with a rookie. Moving the goal list with people like me ain’t gonna work… Haaaaaa
LikeLike
I already said that Child’s was interviewed as a favor to Clyburn. I don’t know where you get “heavily” from. No one said we are “heavily” considering Michelle Child’s.
How could you say that and not choose her?
LikeLike
Yes I know YOU said that. Now just looking for ONE source to back it up. That’s where we keep getting sidetracked, when I ask for evidence like I sent you… Lol
LikeLike
Here is a link :https://afj-org.zoom.us/w/88443225830?tk=xwPL4pfRFMxd-FLJgNSqS_M_RtwVbFnF6BocRHAtLEQ.DQMAAAAUl6CG5hZ1ZGMzQTdJWlMxdVlmTm8xN3h0RWhnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA&uuid=WN_HxaI9wEaQIacLz46iK961w
It’s coming up by 3pm eastern time today with recently confirmed biden LGBTQ judge jamar walker in Virginia along with obama judges staci Yandle and judge Darrin gayles.
They are going to talk about thier pathways and offer insights.
Webinar ID:884 4322 5830
LikeLike
I’m on the call too @aangren. I set my alarm yesterday so I wouldn’t miss it.
LikeLike
About Wisconsin, I found an article on Judge Hammer, who’s also a law professor.
https://schneiderschool.snc.edu/academics/profiles/marc.hammer.html
LikeLike
Dequan, I’m on a roll. Here’s something about the other possible nominee.
https://www.habush.com/attorneys/byron-b-conway
LikeLike
Really good Zoom call sponsored by Alliance for Justice. Here are some of the highlights I jotted down.
Judge Yandel said Obama was committed to diversity & Biden has doubled down. She spoke about many KBJ opinions proving diversity matters as you can see a different perspective. She hilariously reminisced about a senators question at her hearing when a senator asked if she will legislate from the bench or calls balls & strikes. She said she calls balls & strikes but her strike zone may be different then another judges. She spoke glowingly about judge Carlton Reeves.
Judge Walker said people were going to his neighbors asking them questions about him. He said everybody in his batch was the first something so he commended Biden.
Judge Gayles spoke about ways for aspiring lawyers could help their chances of getting clerkships.
LikeLike
aagren & Dequan
I missed it, but thanks for sharing and recapping. I love these events but simply can never make them, so I rely on watching the recording.
Judge Jamar Walker is still new and I have lots of hope for him, but even right now I would sell my soul to have him replace Thomas on SCOTUS.
LikeLike
I think I might sell my soul to have Irma Ramirez replace Thomas. I think just about anyone would be an improvement there. Lol.
LikeLike
We don’t need another confirmation that we’ve been living in Zients’ World, but here’s one more. He wants cabinet members to leave now if they plan on resigning so that he can avoid confirmation fights as the campaign heats up:
https://www.axios.com/2023/06/07/zients-quiet-biden-cabinet-calls
This is a great strategy… for *executive-level staff.*
Unfortunately, we know that he has the same strategy for judicial nominees. The only way we’ll get decent nominees is if blue state senators send the WH a list of only decent nominees. If Dems send lists of decent recommendations and one bad or mediocre candidate, it’s a safe bet that the WH will go with the bad or mediocre candidate. For example, Oregon. Don’t expect any of the decent candidates from the recent list to be selected.
This really makes me appreciate even more the days of Dale Hos we got.
Relatedly, maybe Zients or someone else should make this same call to federal judges, encourage them to retire this year. Of course, this wouldn’t be groundbreaking. The Republicans did just that in the second half of the Trump Admin.
LikeLike
@Gavi
I completely agree with you. As I said a couple weeks ago, I think de facto blue slips are back for circuit court vacancies. If so. The days of A+ or even A nominees are over unless we get lucky with a vacancy in a blue state. No more Rachel Bloomekatz or Andre Mathis. And with the current vacancies, I’m not expecting A+ or A’s for the 1st, 4th & damn sure ain’t expecting one for the 3rd knowing Menendez & Booker have any say so whatsoever in the decision.
LikeLike
I just noticed, this year we haven’t gotten more than one new batch in the same month. Even more concerning, the last six batches have alternated between 4 & 2 new nominees. No wonder the SJC has missed three hearing slots with a fourth likely to come.
January 18 – 4
February 22 – 2
March 20 – 4
April 14 – 2
May 3 – 4
June 7 – 2
LikeLike
We noted this before.
This is why I looked askance at the certitude of @Joe’s declaration a few days ago:
“We will get at least two this week with the possibility of a couple more.”
Just Joe up to his usual rosy optimism.
Do you remember two weeks ago when some believed that Irma Ramirez would be confirmed via voice vote today, bypassing all the other procedural steps?
LikeLike
Gavi, I meant two confirmations (Vera and Pitts), not new nominees or batches.
Sorry, I probably worded that oddly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another OR vacancy: https://eugeneweekly.com/2023/06/10/federal-judge-ann-aiken-to-retire/
LikeLike
This is great news. As I wrote on the blog a couple weeks ago, there are two more judges on the district eligible for senior status. Out of the 6 recommendations, I gave 5 of the 6 an A or A+ so I was really hoping for an additional vacancy. No reason why we shouldn’t get two outstanding nominees for Oregon.
LikeLike
I see two very obvious reasons we’ll get disappointing nominees for both seats:
1. Jeff Zients
2. Stuart Delery
It’s beyond me how no progressives have called for the resignations of the two idiots above yet.
LikeLike
The good news is out of the six Oregon recommendations, only one isn’t good. I literally would give four of them an A & Nadia Dahab A+. So even this WHC can’t screw two vacancies up. The key will be hopefully the one bad nominee isn’t chosen for either. Now that I wouldn’t be too confident in but with the math I’m hoping we can get two good or great picks just by mathematically mistake.
LikeLike
That’s pure speculation. The last two years are going to be more difficult.
LikeLike
@Hank
This morning I said that with Zients, we are guaranteed to get the bad pick for one of these vacancies.
This is why senators’ recommendations should be airtight. That’s where we need to start from, to get good nominees.
And I can’t even completely blame Zients. Pocan was on the same list with much better candidates, but the pre-Zients WH went with him. But we’re told that it’s all about senators and congresspeople don’t any much influence in these selections…
LikeLike
I’m thankful the 4th vacancy happened early in the administration. Warner & Kaine sent Tony Heytens with two district court judges bien 1960 & 1962 for recommendations. I said back then that’s basically sending only one name because the other two wouldn’t be seriously considered just based on their ages alone. Had that happened now, I’m not too sure one of the judges wouldn’t have been picked over Heytens.
Illinois is another good example. They sent seven recommendations. There was initially just one vacancy so they picked one of the best options for the seat with Nancy Maldonado. Since then 4 more judges have been picked. I would argue the two remaining judges left to be picked for the one vacancy should have been the second & third picks. Now we will have to see if the WH picks Nicholas Gowen or Karen Shelley for the final vacancy.
LikeLike
Judging by his Florida appointees, we should believe him:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4045796-desantis-pledges-to-do-better-than-trump-on-picking-supreme-court-justices/#:~:text=Florida%20Gov.%20Ron%20DeSantis%20(R,2024%20rival%20in%20picking%20justices.
God help us.
LikeLike
My governor DeSantis is full of crap. His first day in office the SCOT-FL had three vacancies because of age limits. The SCOTUS doesn’t have age limits. But hopefully he will never come within shouting distance of The White House so we don’t have to worry about it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think Biden legacy will be more so on the district courts bc of how many judges that will match up with trumps total or even more. I don’t think he’ll get as much circuit court judges as trump sadly but these judges will help keep a liberal majority on circuit courts like the ninth,tenth,second and a few others.
LikeLike
I am predicting there will be another package of nominees in 2 to 5 weeks. I expect it’ll consist of the three southern Florida nominees and the final nominee for Louisiana. Perhaps another nominee from other a blue state could be included.
LikeLike
Mitch, I suspect that is about right. Might possibly see a Wisconsin or SC pick as well.
There’s also the “couple” of Texas recommendations that have been sent to the WH as well.
LikeLike
The article said Cornyn was ready to recommend a couple of nominees. So if he hasn’t recommended yet, there’s no way they will be in the next batch even with supersonic vetting. Same for Wisconsin.
If I had to guess the nominees for the next batch, there’s an outside chance the 3 from the SDFL are finished being vetted. Almost certainly we will get wither Nicholas Gowen or Karen Shelley for the NDIL. The South Carolina nominee is possible as the names were released a few months ago for the two-woman recommended. I would also guess one or both California nominees too. We could also get either or both New Jersey nominees.
LikeLike
And we get cloture motions for Choudhury and Rikelman. Excellent news!
I wonder if this means Manchin might be a yes on Rikelman? Either way it’s very exciting, since she’s been one of the best Biden circuit nominees so far.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ho again as well. I guess he’s taken his Monday attendance and knows he’s got a green light. Here’s to a better week than last!
LikeLike
Cloture motions sent for Dale Ho, Nursat Choudhury & Julie Rikelman. OMG this might be the first time in my life I’ve ever seen three A+ nominees have cloture motions sent in the same day. Schumer has redeemed himself. Great job
LikeLiked by 2 people
I remember when Harry Reid filed cloture on David Barron, that was probably most excited I was before today on seeing a nominee get set up for a vote..
LikeLike
Today is my second favorite cloture motion day ever. I don’t think my personal favorite can ever be surpassed. After Democrats lost the senate majority in 2014, they were about to recess for Christmas with over a dozen judicial nominees not confirmed. I was literally SCREAMING at my television for them to file cloture motions but to no avail.
Then all of a something Ted Cruz did some stupid stunt that kept the senate in session. Because of that, Harry Reid filed cloture on all of the remaining pending nominees. I think if I had run into Tedd Cruz that day I would have literally kissed him. That’s how happy I was at his stunt… Lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
The VP is probably in town this week I’ll assume as some of these nominees could easily end in a 50-50 vote
LikeLike
@Rick
Dale Ho, Nursat Choudhury & Julie Rikelman were the three nominees I predicted Manchin would vote no on. I assume VP Harris has committed she will be in town for all six votes and/or they have a heads-up Tim Scott will be out of town.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agree. Very, very exciting stuff.
LikeLike
https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/91333460-8820-4a1e-af30-95880b8419c6/6/doc/21-33_complete_opn.pdf#xml=https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/91333460-8820-4a1e-af30-95880b8419c6/6/hilite/
This is an excellent ruling by a Biden judge. This is what I want to see a person without means getting a fair review of their case.
LikeLike
It’s a good ruling and a reminder of why elections matter.
Eunice Lee wouldn’t be on the 2nd Circuit if Biden had lost and we hadn’t won the Senate, a right wing hack would have been and would have given Trump hack Richard Sullivan the majority option which would have denied a fair review.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, Lee is a good one. It’s a big reason why I’m still defensive of Biden and Schumer at times. They’ve had some underwhelming picks no doubt but they and the Dem senate have put so many wonderful judges on the federal judiciary.
I’m looking forward to more of them the next 18 months and hopefully beyond.
LikeLike
I hope this guy gets a lawyer so he can get the damages he’s entitled to. The 3 cops need to be fired and placed in prison.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am looking forward to hernan vera confirmation the guy has waited for so long. Nice to see ho and chodhury too on the senate calendars
LikeLike
Looks like Manchin is even voting no on non judicial nominees. I’m happy they getting a lot of his No votes out of the way this week. After this week, the only nominees that have been pending longer than a year will be Bloomekatz & Kato. I hope Schumer moves on their nominations next week before the two week recess.
(https://twitter.com/SenatePress/status/1668695131686314014?cxt=HHwWvICxqbLYsqguAAAA)
LikeLike
Cartwright and Merle as well. They’re from Jan 2022.
LikeLike
He already has a job. Nobody made him apply to be a district court judge.
LikeLike
@Frank
True but we are not complaining about Vera. We are complaining about it taking that long to confirm ANY judge in a Democrat majority. Our rights are on the line. We want Biden judges confirmed quicker. The time it is taking is rivaling Mitch McConnell.
LikeLike
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a proponent for filling seats where judicial vacancies exist. However, “aagren” wasn’t making that argument.
LikeLike
Oh ok. Well the good thing is with Vera’s confirmation, the longest judicial vacancy will finally be over since this seat has been open since 10/29/2015. Here are the remainder of the vacancies that were open before Biden too office;
10/08/2017 – Kato,Kenly Kiya
01/01/2018 – Joun,Myong J.
09/11/2018 – Ho,Dale E.
03/22/2019 – No nominee
05/08/2019 – Choudhury,Nusrat Jahan
12/31/2019 – No nominee but Wisconsin just recommended two possible nominees.
01/01/2020 – Cartwright,Tiffany M.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think Manchin is almost certainly a nay on Ho and Rikelman.
Manchin is potentially a nay on Bloomekatz, Kenly Kato, Bjelkengren, & Crews.
de Alba might get zero Republican votes (at most she gets Collins & Murkowski) but Manchin will likely support her since the shenanigans Graham is pulling on her are similar to his justification for opposing KBJ’s Supreme Court nomination.
Choudhury also might get zero Republican votes but I think Manchin likely supports.
All other nominees are likely to get at least 1 Republican vote.
LikeLike
Here’s JD Vance saying he will block all DOJ nominees because if the way they are treating Trump. No unanimous consent agreements for confirmation. I swear I wish Democrats would stop playing games with these people & take away blue slips as punishment.
LikeLike
Article III nominations don’t belong to the DOJ.
This will affect US attorney and marshal nominations, though.
LikeLike
@Gavi
Yea I know. I was saying there’s no punishment for what Vance is doing. So now we have to have a cloture & roll call vote for all these nominees that normally would just be a voice vote. So my point is there needs to be some form of punishment. If not, what’s stopping the Republicans from doing this?
LikeLike
I just checked, looks like he’s exempting US marshal nominees as well? Of course, he wouldn’t want the blame for blocking any law enforcement officers that could potentially impact court security.
This will not be **too impactful to floor time, since they’ve been doing roll call votes on more and more DOJ nominees who were traditionally confirmed without fuss.
But I agree, there needs to be some cost to these senators. I don’t think it’ll ever be blue slip; it should be with the scheduling of these votes (god forbid we get another tired lecture from Frank on this subject).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yea exactly. Some punishment. My answer is blue slips but if not that at least something.
LikeLike
That sounds about right to me Ryan. Personally I think he will be a yes for Bloomekatz because it’s a nominee strongly supported by one of his fellow red state Dems. But we will see.
LikeLiked by 1 person
After being nominated back in 2021, Herman Vera has finally been confirmed to the bench.
Good for him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hernan Vera confirmed 51-48. Great to have that one off the books. Tuberville missed todays votes so he could go be by the former president’s side tonight apparently and his colleagues are upset his absence means Harris isn’t needed for the tied Bernstein vote. Manchin is against. Too bad they haven’t scheduled Ho for tonight too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love it. Let Tuberville hang out in Mar-a-largo all night. Maybe he will miss tomorrow too… Lol
Now just need Tim Scott to start missing some time. He’s the only senator running for president yet he never misses any votes… Uuuggghhh
LikeLiked by 1 person
He just started running for president. Give it a few weeks and I think you’ll start seeing him miss more votes.
LikeLike
Ok tomorrow is part two of International Dale Ho Day. Day one was horrible last week. Let’s hope for a much better result tomorrow… Lol
(https://twitter.com/SenatePress/status/1668758217147711488?cxt=HHwWgIDU0bmwz6guAAAA)
LikeLike
Should be noted that everyone (hopefully) getting confirmed tomorrow is filling a seat that is a judicial emergency, as was the seat Herman Vera was confirmed to today.
Another reason to celebrate besides them being heavy hitters.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely @Zack Jones. Next week is another 2 day work week so I really hope the second both days soley on judges. That would be a nice way to go into the 2 week recess.
LikeLike
I feel much better about this time Dequan. At least we have all 51 Dems in town this time plus Tuberville maybe still out of town.
Getting Pitts plus cloture on Choudhury will be awesome as well.
LikeLike
Yes I feel better about tomorrow too. I know Trump doesn’t drink but it would be nice if he got Tuberville drunk & he woke up hungover tomorrow. Then his flight gets delayed & doesn’t get back to DC until around 8pm. That would be the perfect ending to International Dale Ho Day part 2… Haaaaaa
LikeLike
Excited to see first Muslim American judge confirmed to the federal judiciary on Thursday but disappointed they didn’t set up any more judicial votes for Thursday, really is a start and stop situation.
LikeLike
She is actually the second Muslim American judge after Zahid Quraishi but first female. I really wish she was. Ok instead to the 7th over John Lee but just to get her on any court at this point is good.
LikeLike
I doubt, that here has been counted correctly, I suspect that Southern District of Mississippi Judge Halil Ozerden, who is of Turkish origin, was the first Muslim federal judge, and Quraishi was the second one, and Choudhury is the third, but first Muslim woman.
But that’s for the statistics.
LikeLike
They usually don’t set up votes until the workday before. So any votes for Thursday will be a set Wednesday night
LikeLike
@Thomas
I don’t think that Halil Ozerden is a Muslim. His father was a Turkish immigrant who married an American Christian.
LikeLike
I looked up very article I could on Halil Ozerden & not one says he is a Muslim. Virtually every article I found on Zahid Quraishi mentions he is the first Muslim federal judge. Plus Ozerden was nominated by GW Bush, yet when Obama nominated Abid Riaz Qureshi 9 years later, every article stated he would have been the first Muslim judge.
LikeLike
Rikelman will have a cloture vote Thursday as well. That’ll be the last vote of the week because there’s up to 30 hours of debate. She should be confirmed next week hopefully.
LikeLike
This is actually really rubbing me the wrong way. Why can’t they do on Thursday exactly what they’re planning to do Wednesday?
File two clotures today for 2 district judges.
Thursday: 11:30 AM confirm Nusrat.
Cloture votes after lunch at 1:30pm and 2:30pm.
Confirmation vote at 5pm and set 2nc confirmation vote for first thing next week. Just like that, 5 district judges in basically 3 full session days.
Why, why can’t they do this, why can’t judges be their focus for ONE week?!
LikeLike
Nevermind, I totally forgot about Rikelman. That’s going to take all day Thursday.
LikeLike
The Monday & Thursday schedule is exactly why I call it a 3 day work week. They work full days on Tuesday & Wednesday. Monday is one vote & Thursday is usually a couple votes so I combine that into one full day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Happy International Dale Ho Day part two y’all. I’ve got my tv on C-Span 2 as we speak. I’m watching Ted Cruz moan about Biden nominees being the most extreme he’s seen in his lifetime & how the Democrats won’t reject any of them. He knows how to make me feel good on this great holiday… Lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
Quick check:
What still undecided case are you most looking forward to this month from SCOTUS?
Also, how do you *hope* (not think) that case will come out? (I’m not asking you to predict miracles; I just want to know how you’d hope the court decide a case, if you had the power.)
LikeLike
There’s a few for me.
For this purpose, I’ll go with the affirmative action cases.
I want the court to strike down race-based acceptance.
And if I had a wand, I’d make the ruling 9-0 against AA.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We are in lockstep on this one. Couldn’t agree more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh really? How about admissions for legacies? I don’t know about private universities but state schools have to have a place for everyone.
I don’t think AA programs are wrong if properly applied.
If you are Cosby kid of course you won’t need it. But, many black families don’t have generational wealth. This was caused by slavery. A wrong that has not been addressed by Congress.
LikeLike
@Gavi
My number one SCOTUS case for this term was decided last week. I predicted wrong in the redistricting case from Alabama. Thankfully I was wrong.
Out of the remaining cases perhaps the one about state legislatures deciding the winners of elections. I’m not sure when that case will be decided but I’m hoping a majority of the justices know how bat sh*t crazy letting legislators overturn elections would be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You mean Moore v. Harper. That would have been at the top of my list but it’s not because it won’t be decided. It’ll be DIG’d or otherwise mooted (following the ruling of the NC Supreme Court).
LikeLike
Ah ok. Thanks for the explanation @Gavi. That case scares me
LikeLike
Let me stress that a final disposition of this case isn’t announced. I’d hate for anything to think that I was claiming to have any inside information haha. I was just using the clearly established practice to forecast what should happen next.
Notwithstanding, this MAGA-SCOTUS may brush aside anything hindering it from reaching its preferred outcome.
LikeLike
Oh yes of course. I know you are just giving your opinion. Nobody on here has inside information. Well maybe except @shawnee68 who claims to know the White House never seriously considered J. Childs for the SCOTUS despite only 3 people getting interviewed by the president & she was one of the three… Lol
By I will rejoice as we are only minutes away from the start of Dale Ho’s cloture vote. Oh happy day.
LikeLike
Gavi for me its the student loan forgiveness case.
I hope the court affirms Biden’s executive order. Doesn’t impact me personally but I know many who it world. Also previous legislation clearly gives the president the authority to do so during a national emergency.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Joe
What do think the make-up of that majority will look like, either way? I can’t see it being anything other than a 6-3, with the conservatives prevailing. The most optimistic I am willing to go is 5-4, with Barrett joining the liberals.
In ordinary times, this case would falter on standing and there’d be no reason to even get to the merits (which would mean the Biden program could proceed).
LikeLike
Gavi, unfortunately I expect the conservative court to ultimately strike it down. I think the best chance for a Biden victory would be for them to kick it out based on standing. Perhaps John Roberts will convince one of the other conservatives to join him in order to avoid any more political fallback.
But if I was betting the mortgage I’d say 6-3 against Biden.
LikeLike
Joe manchin is going to oppose ho and tuberville is back in session.
LikeLike
As some of us guessed a year ago.
We need to make sure that the two most important Californians are ready to vote to confirm him 51-50!
LikeLiked by 1 person
My guess is Manchin is planning to vote no on two nominees today. I hope VP Harris has Uber Eats on speed dial & they can bring her food directly to the senate floor today. I think it will be a long day for her at her old job.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pitts cloture invoked. The Dale Ho cloture vote has begun. I’m officially excited
LikeLike
WHAT WAS THE VOTE?!
LikeLike
Pitts was 53-46. Not sure who missed the vote. I’m hoping for a R to miss Ho’s
LikeLike
I see. Was curious because I didn’t see the VP in the chair so was wondering if she’s even needed. I don’t care either way, but hope she’s just chilling in her senate office, just off the floor.
LikeLike
Looks like Tim Scott is absent, so this first vote may be straightforward.
LikeLike
OMG Tim Scott was the missing vote? Yes yes yes. My prediction of him eventually missing votes may finally be coming true. If he misses today & tomorrow I may donate to his campaign. I want him in the primary right up until the very end.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tim Scott for president… Lol
LikeLike
Dale Ho cloture invoked 50-49
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you to senator sinema as much as i dont like her this is the core and substantial difference between a sinema and the best republican like collins, her vote has been crucial for abudu and ho and other judges too.
She has been excellent on judges, which is funny because she is on the commerce committee and tanks biden FAA administrator nominee and other nominees as well
LikeLiked by 1 person
I said a while back had Sinema stayed a Democrat & cut out the over the top shenanigans, she likely would have gotten re-elected. As you said, she’s been rock solid on judges. She got Trump to nominate a Democrat to the district court & not only recommended an A+ nominee for the 9th, but got her confirmed in 50 days with a filibuster proof vote.
Now on to continue celebrating. I’m happy to see Tim Scott is out of DC celebrating International Dale Ho Day today… Lol
LikeLike
This is why I didn’t want Ruben to run, I think she would’ve won re-election pretty easy with Trump on the ballot in Arizona, especially if Lake ran but now I can only hope she retires but I’ve been seeing ads from her.
Hopefully she realizes polling 20% in a 3 way ain’t it and bows out next year.
LikeLike
Sinema’s decision making in the last 18 months has been puzzling to say the least. Had she charted a more mainstream D track and not left the party then she probably gets the D nomination and wins in 2024 easily.
Personally I think she was banking on a Mark Kelly defeat in 2022 and pitching herself as the only electable option to the party.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pitts confirmed. Congrats to him who I also gave an A+ to in his own right. Now the Dale Ho confirmation vote has begun. This is truly a great day for the judiciary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Joe, I think you hit the nail on the head.
Sinema expected to be the last Democrat standing in AZ and instead is now the odd person out.
LikeLike
LOL at Tim Scott not being there so Harris once again won’t be needed.
LikeLike
The article said Tim Scott is hosting a presidential campaign event in Iowa tonight. Something tells me Schumer & Durbin will be monitoring his schedule very closely over the next year or so. As soon as he post a campaign event for a future date, they should be teeing up the most liberal nominees for that date. I can see the Labor Secretary being scheduled for a vote at such a time as well.
(https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/senator-manchin-to-oppose-hos-nomination-to-new-york-court-seat?source=newsletter&item=read-text®ion=digest)
LikeLiked by 1 person
This would be pretty sweet, and it gives Manchin cover to bring down his voting with Joe % so they can’t use that as much against him with attack ads.
Hope whatever billionaire is funding Scotts campaign to be VP keeps him on the trail for another 2-3 months.
LikeLike
Tim Scott has the sixth richest person on the planet bankrolling him. I expect he will stay in the race well into next year. He’s African American, conservative, from the crucial state of South Carolina, Trump will have many more missteps & money won’t be an issue for him.
I fully expect Manchin to continue bucking his party with more no votes. Of course I also don’t expect too many more Dale Ho’s from this new WHC office so getting past next week, it may not be as much of an issue going forward anyway. The key is great strategy from Schumer like we saw this week. I’m not sure how far in advance Tim Scott post his schedule but I’m sure it’s got to be at least a few days in advance. Since cloture motions are usually sent a couple days before the vote, they should be monitoring Scott’s schedule daily.
LikeLike
I just watched Ted Cruz storm in the senate floor & angrily put a thumbs down then immediately storm back out. My God if Dale Ho getting confirmed wasn’t good enough, seeing that visual makes it that much better.
I remember for the Ho SJC vote Cruz asking is there any nominee the Democrats won’t rubber stamp. If President Biden sent a ham sandwich to the SJC would they confirm it too.
@Gavi
Please forgive me. I know it’s not Christian like to get so much joy from another man’s pain but I can’t help myself today. I promise I’ll do better tomorrow… Haaaaa
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ha!
I thrive on Ted Cruz’s tears, even when he’s only acting (which he usually is!):
LikeLike
@Gavi
Haaaaaaa… OMG if there was a tv station solely replaying Ted Cruz, Marsha Blackburn & a few more tears, I would happily pay to subscribe.
@Zack Jones
I totally agree. Dale Ho not being confirmed for a circuit court seat is the ONLY bad thing about today. I will try to not let that dapper my spirits though as otherwise this is a spectacular day. Now let me see if I can rewind C-Span 2 & rewatch the Cruz vote again…. Lmao
LikeLike
This anger only makes me wish Ho had been nominated to the 2nd Circuit or even SCOTUS to make the anger even better.
LikeLike