Last November, Democrats defied political gravity and expanded their razor-thin majority in the U.S. Senate, enabling them to continue confirming judicial nominees for another two years. Six months into their Senate, it is worth taking a look at their progress and the landscape that remains.
In the last Congress, despite depending on the Vice President’s vote for their Senate majority, the Senate confirmed 97 Article III judges: one to the U.S. Supreme Court; 28 to the Courts of Appeal; and 68 to the U.S. District Courts. To maintain a similar pace, Democrats would need to have confirmed between 25-30 judges so far.
The good news is that, so far, Democrats are on pace to slightly exceed their pace, having confirmed 39 judges so far (7 appellate and 32 district) and on pace to confirm two more next week. The less positive news, however, is that the pace of nominations from the White House has dramatically slowed. After sending 55 nominations to the Senate in his first year and 70 in his second year, Biden has nominated just 30 judges so far this year. He has also had to deal with the first nomination losses of his Administration, with one appellate and two district judges being withdrawn, with a third potentially going the same route.
As a result of this slowdown in nominations, the majority of existing judicial vacancies lack nominees, and the Senate has only enough nominees to carry through its current confirmation pace to August. A summary of this landscape follows:
D.C. Circuit – 0 vacancies out of 11 judgeships
In two and a half years, Biden has managed to appoint four judges to the so-called “second highest court in the land”, starting with now-Supreme Court Justice Jackson, who was confirmed to the court in June 2021, a mere two months after her nomination. In 2022, Judge David Tatel was replaced by Judge Michelle Childs while Judge Florence Pan was confirmed to replace Jackson when she was elevated. This year, 37-year-old Brad Garcia was confirmed to fill the last remaining vacancy on the court, vacated lat year by Judge Judith Ann Wilson Rogers. The influential court has only one judge who is currently eligible for senior status, 78-year-old Karen Henderson, who has shown no sign of slowing down, making it unlikely that Biden would have any more appointees to the court this term.
The only district court that reports to the D.C. Circuit is the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The 15-judgeship court has two sitting Biden appointees and two current vacancies, from Pan’s elevation, for which Judge Todd Edelman remains pending on the senate floor for confirmation, and from Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s move to senior status last month, for which D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Loren AliKhan is pending a final Judiciary Committee vote. The outgoing chief judge of the court, Judge Beryl Howell, is the sole appointee on the court who is eligible for senior status, leaving the possibility that Biden may get an additional appointment to the court.
First Circuit – 1 vacancy out of 6 judgeships (no nominee pending)
The smallest court of appeals in the country was also the sole geographically-based court not to see a single Trump appointment. Biden has already named Judge Gustavo Gelpi and Public Defender Lara Montecalvo to the court. This year, reproductive rights attorney Julie Rikelman was confirmed to replace Judge Sandra Lynch, moving the court significantly to the left. The final seat, based in New Hampshire, was vacated by Judge Jeffrey Howard last year, and lacks a nominee now that Michael Delaney withdrew last month in the face of bipartisan opposition. Unless the Biden Administration has been pre-vetting an alternate candidate, it is unlikely that a new nominee to replace Howard will hit the senate before August. Meanwhile, Judge William Kayatta, who is based out of Maine, remains a possible contender to take senior status as well, giving Biden a chance to name five out of the six judges on the court.
While this Senate has already confirmed district judges to seats in Massachusetts and Puerto Rico, the district courts covered by the First Circuit have two pending judicial vacancies, both in Massachusetts, and both have nominees pending a final vote on the floor.
An additional five district judges in the circuit remain eligible for senior status: Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor and Judges Nathaniel Gorton, Patti Saris, and Richard Stearns in Massachusetts; and Judge Aida Delgado-Colon in Puerto Rico. Judge Jon Levy, who becomes eligible for senior status next year in Maine, has already announced his intention to take it. No public process has been announced to select a replacement.
Second Circuit – 0 vacancies out of 13 judgeships
After replacing five left-leaning judges on the Second Circuit in the last Congress, the Senate confirmed Justice Maria Araujo Kahn to replace 81-year-old conservative Jose Cabranes in March, transforming the court. With Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston unlikely to take senior status before her term as chief ends, there is unlikely to be another appointment to the Second Circuit for several years.
Of the states covered by the Second Circuit, Connecticut, which saw three Biden appointees hit the bench last year, currently has two of the eight active district judgeships vacant and one pending nominee, Judge Vernon Oliver, who received a Judiciary Committee hearing last month. It is expected that a second nominee is incoming.
Meanwhile, the district courts in New York, after six confirmations this Congress, are down to four current and future vacancies. The Eastern District of New York has one vacancy out of sixteen judgeships, with a nominee pending on the floor. Additionally, one nominee, Margaret Garnett, was submitted this week to fill a vacancy on the Southern District of New York. The remaining two vacancies, one on the Southern District, and one on the Western District, lack nominees.
Third Circuit – 1 vacancies out of 14 judgeships (no nominee pending)
The Senate confirmed two Biden appointees to this court last Congress (Arianna Freeman nominated to replace Judge Theodore McKee and Justice Tamika Montgomery-Reeves to replace Judge Thomas Ambro). This year, the Senate confirmed Cindy Chung to replace Judge Brooks Smith. This leaves one vacancy, left by Judge Joseph Greenaway’s retirement, which lacks a nominee, but is expected to get one expeditiously. Additional vacancies this Congress are unlikely unless Judge Kent Jordan chooses to take senior status.
All three states covered by the Third Circuit have judicial vacancies. The biggest number are in Pennsylvania, which has three vacancies, two of which have nominees. Additionally, Judge Richard Andrews on the District of Delaware has indicated his desire to take senior status in December and Judge Jennifer Hall is being nominated to replace him.
The District of New Jersey, vacancy-ridden when the Biden Administration came to office, is now down to two seats left to fill, both of which are scheduled to open in the coming months. An additional seat may open if Biden chooses to elevate a district court judge to replace Greenaway (if he does so, Judges Georgette Castner and Zahid Quraishi are the most likely). The Senate previously confirmed two judges to the court this Congress and will likely process new nominees promptly.
Fourth Circuit – 1 vacancy out of 15 judgeships (no nominee pending)
After the confirmation of Judge DeAndrea Benjamin to the Fourth Circuit early this year, the big question mark in the Fourth Circuit is a Maryland vacancy first announced in December 2021 that still lacks a nominee. This has been reported to be the result of an impasse between the White House and Sen. Ben Cardin. With this Congress six months through, the clock is ticking for the two sides to reach a compromise, particularly as additional vacancies on the Fourth Circuit are possible with six other judges eligible for senior status (Chief Judge Roger Gregory, who ends his term as chief this year, is one judge to watch in particular).
One sign of optimism for the White House is that they were able to agree on two district court nominations in Maryland that are pending before the Senate, including Judge Brendan Hurson on the senate floor.
The Western District of North Carolina, meanwhile, has one current and one future vacancy, with no nominee on the horizon. An additional three North Carolina judges are eligible for senior status, leaving the possibility of additional vacancies opening.
The District of South Carolina currently has one vacancy, after Judge J. Michelle Childs was elevated to the D.C. Circuit. Late last year, it was suggested that U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Austin and attorney Beth Drake were under consideration to replace Childs, but no nominee has hit the senate yet. Additional vacancies are possible as Judge David Norton was rumored to be considering senior status in 2021, and Judge Richard Gergel is eligible as well.
The confirmations of two Virginia district judges earlier this year has left the state without any vacancies. With Judge Leonie Brinkema on the Eastern District of Virginia showing little appetite for slowing down, it is unlikely that the White House would get additional appointments in this state this term.
Meanwhile, West Virginia is the only state in the Fourth Circuit that has not yet seen a vacancy under Biden. Nonetheless, four of the state’s eight active judges are eligible for senior status, making it a reasonable chance that an additional vacancy may open this Congress.
Fifth Circuit – 1 vacancy out of 17 judgeships (one nominee pending)
Having appointed Judge Dana Douglas to the Fifth Circuit last year, Biden is poised to have a second appointment to the court in Judge Irma Ramirez. Six other judges on the Fifth Circuit are eligible for senior status, leaving a serious possibility that additional vacancies may open before the end of this Senate.
Louisiana’s Republican senators have managed to reach consensus with the Biden Administration on four nominations now, including two pending district court picks. It also appears that the senators had signed off on a third district court nominee to fill the last vacancy on the district court but the White House decided to drop the nominee from the package. Nonetheless, the good relationship that the parties have built should stand them well in filling the vacancy, as well as others that may open (six other Louisiana judges are eligible for senior status and a seventh will become eligible next year).
Mississippi, meanwhile, is in a holding pattern as the nomination of Scott Colom has stalled due to the late-breaking opposition of Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith. With two other judges eligible for senior status, it is possible that a deal may grease Colom’s path to confirmation. Otherwise, only a change in blue slip policy would allow him to move forward.
No other state has more pending district court vacancies than Texas (eight to be precise) without any nominees pending. However, Texas senators have been collecting applications for the vacancies and the successful collaboration over Ramirez’s nomination suggests that deals can still be made. With twelve additional judges eligible for senior status, more vacancies may be on the horizon.
Sixth Circuit – 1 vacancies out of 16 judgeships (one nominee pending)
Of the three vacancies on the Sixth Circuit that opened in the Biden Administration, only the Ohio based seat of Judge R. Guy Cole remains open. Rachel Bloomekatz, nominated to replace Cole, is awaiting a final vote on the senate floor, which should come before the August recess. Of the remaining judges on the court, five are eligible for senior status: Judges Karen Nelson Moore, Eric Clay, Julia Smith Gibbons, Richard Allen Griffin, and Jane Branstetter Stranch. As such, it would not be surprising to see an additional vacancy open before the end of this Congress.
On the district court level, two of the four states under the Sixth Circuit have vacancies pending. After the White House’s proposal to nominate conservative lawyer Chad Meredith to the Eastern District of Kentucky fell through, Judge Karen Caldwell withdrew her intention to take senior status. As Caldwell and Judge Danny Reeves are the only judges on the Kentucky federal bench who are eligible for senior status, it is unlikely that Biden would be able to name any judges to the state.
With the confirmation of Judge Jonathan Grey to the Eastern District of Michigan this year, the court has three pending vacancies with two nominees pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee. With five other Michigan district judges eligible for senior status, there is a strong possibility that additional vacancies may open this Congress.
After the confirmation of four judges last year, there are no vacancies on the district courts of Ohio. However, five judges remain eligible for senior status, and it is conceivable that additional vacancies may open, particularly as Chief Judge Algernon Marbley ages out of his position next year.
Finally, a vacancy is pending on the Western District of Tennessee. The White House and Tennessee Senators battled over the Sixth Circuit nomination of Andre Mathis, and no nominee has been put forward to replace Judge John Fowlkes, who took senior status last year. If additional vacancies open (three judges are eligible for senior status), it is possible that the White House may be able to strike a package deal with Tennessee senators to fill the vacancies.
Seventh Circuit – 1 vacancy out of 11 judgeships (no nominees pending)
Having named Judge Candace Jackson-Akiwumi, Judge John Lee, and Judge Doris Pryor to the Seventh Circuit last Congress, a fourth vacancy, opened by Judge Michael Kanne’s death, still lacks a nominee. Indiana’s Republican Senators worked with the White House to support Pryor, Judge Matthew Brookman for a district court seat, and two U.S. Attorney nominees. As such, it is expected that the White House will put forward a compromise candidate for the Seventh Circuit, likely paired with candidates to fill two vacancies on the Northern District of Indiana. If an additional seat opens, it will likely be that of Judge Ilana Rovner, who is in her mid-eighties and has been on the bench since the 1970s.
On the district court level, two vacancies are pending on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, with one nominee pending a final vote on the senate floor. The last vacancy will likely get a nominee in the coming weeks.
Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, Judge William Pocan‘s nomination was withdrawn due to the opposition of Sen. Ron Johnson, and Wisconsin’s senators recommended two alternate candidates for the seat: state judge Marc Hammer and personal injury attorney Byron Conway three weeks ago. As such, a nominee is unlikely to come before September. However, with three other Wisconsin district judges eligible for senior status, another vacancy may well open before the end of the Congress.
Eighth Circuit – 0 vacancies out of 11 judgeships
The Eighth Circuit remains the sole court of appeals not to see a vacancy open under Biden, even as three judges are currently eligible for senior status and a fourth becomes eligible next year. Each of the four, however, are fairly conservative, and may choose to hold off on senior status until a Republican Administration.
Out of the eight active judgeships among Arkansas’ two districts, only one remains vacant, left open by Judge P.K. Holmes’ move to senior status in 2021. However, despite two and a half years since Judge Holmes announced his move to senior status, no nominee has been announced. Given that the White House has been unable to agree with senators even on U.S. Attorney nominees in Arkansas, the prospects of a nominee seem remote, despite talks ongoing.
With the confirmation of Judge Stephen Locher to the Southern District of Iowa last year, the state is unlikely to see further vacancies this Congress, given the youth of all of its judges.
Having named two judges to the Minnesota district court last Congress, Biden has opportunity to replace Judge John Tunheim this year, and is expected to nominate Minnesota Court of Appeals Judge Jeffrey Bryan next month.
With three vacancies, Missouri is likely the sight of much Democratic frustration, as the state’s Republican senators have shown little willingness to agree to confirm replacements. As such, barring a change in blue slip policy, it is unlikely that Missouri will get any new judges soon.
The District of Nebraska has had a vacancy pending from Judge John Gerrard’s move to senior status. Senator Deborah Fischer opened the application process to replace Gerrard with a deadline in December 2022, suggesting that recommendations have likely already been made to the White House. If the Administration and senators can get on the same page, a nomination can likely be made and confirmed this year.
The District of North Dakota has two Trump appointees and no vacancies, while its neighbor to the south has two vacancies that need filling. Recent press suggests that the state’s Republican senators are not standing in the way of new appointments and that conversations are ongoing, suggesting optimism that nominations can be confirmed by the end of the year.
Ninth Circuit – 1 vacancy out of 29 judgeships (one nominee pending)
Compared to other courts of appeals, the White House has had comparative success in confirming judges to the Ninth Circuit, naming seven, with an eighth, Judge Ana de Alba, pending a final Senate vote. Of the judges who remain, six judges remain eligible for senior status, raising a fair possibility that an additional appointment may come Biden’s way.
Of the district courts covered by the Ninth Circuit, Biden has already named 29 judges, with seven additional nominees pending. One state that is still awaiting a nominee, however, is Alaska, which has still not seen a nominee to replace Judge Timothy Burgess who took senior status in December 2021. With Judge Sharon Gleason becoming eligible for senior status next year, a nomination grows increasingly important.
Similarly, Arizona has not seen any Biden district court appointees, although that is because no seat has opened during the Administration. However, in 2024, judges Douglas Rayes and James Soto become eligible for senior status, raising the possibility that Biden may be able to name some judges in Arizona.
California is the site of Biden’s greatest success on judicial nominations, with Biden having named 19 district judges, more than any other president in one term. An additional four nominees are pending confirmation of the senate floor and expected to be confirmed in the next few weeks. Furthermore, three other vacancies still lack nominees, and additional twelve judges are eligible for senior status. As such it would not be surprising to see Biden named thirty judges to the California district courts by the end of this term.
The District of Hawaii is expected to have some new judges with Judges J. Michael Seabright and Leslie Kobayashi taking senior status next year. Hawaii Senators Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz have set up an evaluation committee to review applications with a deadline in March 2023, making it likely that new nominees should hit the senate in the coming months.
This Senate confirmed Judge Amanda Brailsford unanimously to a seat on the District of Idaho, adding gender diversity to one of a handful of all-male courts left in the nation.
Judge Dana Christensen in Montana has announced his intention to take senior status upon confirmation of a successor, and Montana’s senators have set up an application process to replace him with an application deadline on June 14 of this year. If the senators can reach an agreement on a nominee, confirmation can be expected promptly.
Having confirmed two judges to the District of Nevada last year, no additional vacancies are expected this Congress, with the bench largely composed of fairly young Obama and Biden nominees.
After the confirmation of Justice Adrienne Nelson to the District of Oregon earlier this year, the state is primed for two more Biden nominees, to replace Judges Ann Aiken and Marco Hernandez. Moving quickly, Oregon senators have already recommended six candidates rates to replace Hernandez. While Aiken does not base her chambers out of Portland, it is possible that one of the recommended candidates may be chosen to replace her.
The Eastern and Western Districts of Washington have seen a major transformation under Biden, with him filling six out of eleven judgeships already. An additional two nominees are expected to be confirmed in July, with the nomination of Charnelle Bjelkengren to the last remaining vacancy likely being a closer call.
Tenth Circuit – 1 vacancy out of 12 judgeships (no nominee pending)
The Kansas seat vacated by Judge Mary Briscoe is the oldest appellate vacancy in the country, and the site of failure by the White House when their first nominee, Jabari Wamble, crashed and burned due to the expectation of a bad ABA rating. Since then, there is little peep regarding a new Tenth Circuit nominee. Meanwhile, three other judges are also eligible for senior status, leaving the possibility that an additional appointment to the court may come Biden’s way.
The Colorado federal bench has seen significant turnover under Biden, with four out of the state’s seven judgeships filled with Biden appointees. Biden has a good chance to secure a fifth appointment upon the confirmation of Judge Kato Crews to fill the lone vacancy on the district court. Meanwhile, Judge Philip Brimmer becomes eligible for senior status next year, raising the possibility of a sixth appointment.
The District of Kansas has one pending vacancy, opened last year by Judge Julie Robinson’s move to senior status. The White House previously nominated Jabari Wamble to this seat, but Wamble withdrew in the face of an unfavorable ABA review, leaving the White House back at square one. If this seat gets filled now, it will likely be in conjunction with the Tenth Circuit vacancy.
Having confirmed three judges to the District of New Mexico, the court now has no pending vacancies, and is unlikely to have additional ones this Congress.
There are currently two vacancies on the Oklahoma district courts, and while Senators James Lankford indicated that he and the White House were having productive conversations back in 2021, there has been no nominee submitted and no updates since Sen. Markwayne Mullin replaced Sen. James Inhofe.
The District of Utah has a single vacancy, from Judge David Nuffer’s move to senior status last year. There has been little movement on a nominee publicly.
The District of Wyoming has a pending vacancy from Judge Nancy Freudenthal’s move to senior status last year. However, there appears to be little movement on a replacement and it is unclear what the status of negotiations is at.
Eleventh Circuit – 0 vacancies out of 12 judgeships
The Biden Administration achieved a significant victory last month when civil rights attorney Nancy Abudu was confirmed to the Eleventh Circuit. However, unless Judge Charles Wilson chooses to take senior status, the Administration is unlikely to secure a second appointment on the circuit.
On the district court level, Alabama has two pending vacancies, one from the elevation of Judge Andrew Brasher in the Trump Administration, and the second from Judge Abdul Kallon’s untimely resignation. Both lack nominees and it remains to be seen if a package can be reached (it’s possible that Alabama senators may demand the renomination of Trump nominee Edmund LaCour).
Florida currently has eight current and future district court vacancies, all of whom lack a nominee. Both Senator Marco Rubio and Florida’s Democratic House delegation recommended attorney Detra Shaw-Wilder (a Democrat) to the Southern District of Florida last year, but she was never nominated. However, in a breakthrough, the White House and senators were reported to have struck a deal to elevate two magistrate judges: Jacqueline Becerra and Melissa Damian; and nominate Rubio choice David Leibowitz to the Southern District. Assuming the deal holds up, nominees should hit the Senate this summer.
Meanwhile, Georgia has no current or pending judicial vacancies, although Judge Mark Treadwell on the Middle District is eligible for senior status and may take it soon.
Federal Circuit – 0 vacancies out of 12 judgeships
Biden has already named two judges to the specialized Federal Circuit, and the court has no current vacancies. However, two factors make this court one to keep an eye on. First, Judge Pauline Newman, at 96, the oldest active judge in the country, is in the middle of a disciplinary action concerning her continued fitness to remain in active status. Other judges on the court are pushing Newman to retire or take senior status, which would open a seat for Biden to fill. Second, even setting Newman aside, four other judges on the court are currently eligible for senior status, including judges Alan Lourie and Timothy Dyk, who are in their mid to late 80s. As such, the odds are in favor of an additional vacancy opening on the Federal Circuit this Congress.
Additionally, after more than two years of waiting, the White House finally named candidates to fill two vacancies on the Court of International Trade, the only Article III court that is required to have partisan balance. The candidates, a pair of a Democratic and Republican pick, should have relatively comfortable confirmations.
Conclusion
At this point, Democrats have many successes to tout in their first six months with a real majority, and have slightly exceeded their confirmation pace from the previous Congress. However, with a Presidential election looming, both the nomination and confirmation pace likely needs to accelerate further to give the Biden Administration a chance to catch up to, if not exceed, the accomplishments of the previous Trump Administration.
The Vetting Room 
Harsh,
Thank you for this. We love these kind of post in addition to the individual bios for nominees.
Reading this makes me angry at the 4th & 5th vacancies not having a nominee & the nominee we got respectively. And 8 vacancies in Texas with no nominee to boot. Truly a low point for Biden so far in regards to the judiciary.
Also thanks for putting the links for the rumored nominees in various states. I know we have discussed them all before, but nice to have them all in one place.
The only thing I would disagree with is the two most likely nominees for the 3rd. It was actually progressives & even some Muslim groups that pushed back on the first would be Muslim circuit court judge in history & Caster is too young & progressive for Menendez & Booker to pick going on their track records so I’m not sure I would say they are the two most likely picks. I think Esther Salas is the most likely pick with her being Hispanic to fill the void many have pointed out under this administration, her being a long time district court judge, her former public defender background & her personal life story losing her son to an assassin that came to her home looking for her. Even Julien Neals isn’t out of the realm of possibility knowing the New Jersey senators. Both would be too old for my liking but just saying that’s the reality of the senators recommending picks to the president.
LikeLike
Castner was just recommended by Menendez, so I wouldn’t rule it out that she gets elevated, but I do agree that Salas is the likely pick.
LikeLike
I was excited when Neals was confirmed the 1st time because he was the first Biden judge. However, I would not be excited if Neals was the 3rd Circuit nominee. Neals and Salas are both ok but not great picks.
LikeLike
Amen to this. Great work Harsh as always!
LikeLike
Blue slips are driving me crazy. When I spoke to Senator Ossoff and asked him if he thinks blue slips will stay, he said he thinks they will, asking me “do you want Republicans appointing judges in the Southern District of New York?”. I didn’t reply there and then but given how partisan everything is, I don’t think any Democrat appointed judges will go senior under a Republican President barring medical reasons.
LikeLike
The main think senator Ossoff & the others are missing is there’s no guarantee the Republicans will continue blue slips when they are back in full power anyway. As a matter of fact, I’d put it at 50/50 odds at best.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I guess I can live with blue slips being required for district courts, but no way should Democrats need them for Circuit courts. The 7th & 10th circuit vacancies should be filled ASAP and if the GOP senators from those states don’t approve of the nominee(s), it should not matter.
Many circuit nominees in the last admin from CA, NY, and some other states with one Democratic senator rejected many of the circuit court nominees only to see them ALL confirmed..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is there evidence showing that Republican senators are interested in giving up blue slips for the district courts though. On the flip side, I don’t think they are interested in seeing progressives potentially getting nominated to district courts in their states
LikeLike
@Frank
I would point to history as evidence.
Republicans were the first party to filibuster a SCOTUS nominee.
Republicans were the first to reject even giving a SCOTUS nominee a hearing, let alone up or down vote.
Republicans were the first to ram through a SCOTUS nominee after voting has begun for the next presidential race.
Republicans were the first to remove the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees.
Republicans were the first to remove blue slips for circuit court nominees.
Republicans were the first since the Carter administration to confirm a circuit court nominee after a presidential election.
So my evidence would be history. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, you get a conservative court for a generation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s fair. Democrats were the ones to first get rid of the filibuster for lower court nominees, so they haven’t been completely blameless.
LikeLike
In addition, blue slips for the district courts has a much more local impact than those other reforms you mentioned, and I can’t see someone as smart as McConnell letting the other Republicans give up having conservative judges in red states. Maybe you are right, I’m just not seeing the benefit for them the way you do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes but district court seats were lower hanging fruit last time Republicans were in complete control. They got rid of the higher hanging fruit (SCOTUS & circuit court) so next time they are in charge, district court seats will be the only thing left the minority can block.
I don’t see where all this confidence is coming from that Republicans will be worried about the future once they are in power again & can’t fill seats in blue states. Wouldn’t you think they would worry about Democrats ramming through SCOTUS or circuit court nominees next time power flipped if they cared about long term ramifications? They don’t care about the future, they care about right now. That’s why they are in power right now.
LikeLike
I think it also depends on how big their majority is. If the GOP majority is 51-49 or 50-50 the next time they take the WH & Senate, I think blue slips stay since they would rely on Collins & Murkowski. If the GOP has a bigger senate majority the next time they have the WH, blue slips are probably gone.
LikeLike
I’m always thinking, maybe naively, that if the constituency in Red States can’t get a court hearing, because their senators block a replacement, it won’t make them happy.
They could blame it on Mitch in 2015-16, but not now.
Most Red States have much smaller courts, so ditching the BS would harm Republicans on district courts more than Democrats, the effect of some FecSoc hacks at the Southern District of New York or the Central District of California wouldn’t be that harmful in numbers than leaving the Northern District of Mississippi unfilled.
And the wish to get a judge honoring civil rights like the Black Causus has published, is more than understandable.
Under rational reasons alone, that should be:
– Northern District of Oklahoma (4):
Two vacancies, one eligible for senior status, one is splitted on three courts.
– Northern District of Mississippi (3)
One vacancy, one eligible for senior status
– Western District of Arkansas (3)
One vacancy, one eligible for senior status soon
– South Dakota (3)
One vacancy, one eligible for senior status and intent to leave
– District of Alaska (3)
One vacancy, one eligible for senior status soon
– District of Wyoming (3)
One vacancy, one eligible for senior status and 84 years old
I also see different grades of pressure on the Red State Senators to find an agreement with the WH, although the Ramirez nomiation was almost as intensively discussed than Childs, I don’t believe that the WH would leave eight vacancies on district courts in Texas completely unfilled, if Cornyn and Cruz would try to do it, that would be the ultimative reason to ditch the Blue Slip, and both of them know it, I assume. That they would try to slow the process down and maybe let some open for the next Republican President, is likely, but not all of them.
The same with Rubio and Scott in Florida.
Cotton with his lone vacancy at the WD of Arkansas might keep it open, Hawley with three ones at the ED of Missouri – maybe.
The others are difficult to estimate.
LikeLike
For those that think Democrats keeping blue slips so that Republicans can’t pack blue states with Federalist Society hacks, ask yourself these questions;
1. Do you a President Trump in a second term in which he can’t run again or. President DeSantis will sit at the Resolute Desk with a Republican senate majority, most circuit court seats filled but about 40 or so district court vacancies in blue states & care about precedent, senate norms or a future Democrat president will do?
2. Do you trust Mitch McConnell, Josh Hawley, Tommy Tuberville, Ted Cruz & Marsha Blackburn in the scenario I just gave above?
LikeLike
If people have to leave their job I can’t imagine that political considerations will play a part. If you have to leave you will and politics will take a back seat.
LikeLike
Thanks for this write up on where we currently stand. Question for posters of the center/left variety. Given the Senate map, would you take a guaranteed Biden win in 2024 and a -2 on the Senate (hypothetically, let’s say West Virginia and one of Montana/Ohio/Arizona) for 49-51? Would have to rely on Graham’s good offices for getting nominees out of the judiciary committee (and him/Collins/Murkowski on the Senate floor), but nominees would be coming from Biden. Or roll the dice on 2024 on both the President and Senate?
LikeLike
I’m less pessimistic/annoyed than some people about the slowing down of Circuit nominees this year, given that if it’s been reversed by the end of 2023 we’ll all be feeling very differently about it. Once the vacancies on the First, Fourth, Seventh and Tenth have been filled, the judicial picture will be quite different. This is doubly-so if successful confirmations prompt additional retirements – Kayatta going after a replacement for Howard is confirmed, and Rovner resigning after Kanne’s replacement is appointed.
That said, the WH needs to be a bit more aggressive this autumn in getting nominees out the doors, especially as from June onwards next year Senators are going to be away from the Senate more, and Sinema is likely to be running an independent campaign that will probably prompt her to pull a few stunts on high-profile nominees. Increasing opposition from Manchin is also a given.
A good number of CoA nominees to have confirmed by the end of this year is probably 40 – 42, assuming some future vacancies. For 2024, I think 45 – 50 is the most we can realistically hope for.
District judges is dependent on how pro-active Senators are, but at a minimum any state with two Democratic Senators should have no outstanding vacancies by the summer recess next year.
LikeLike
I will add to this my perennial complaint that if Gould and Wardlaw aren’t being leant on very heavily to step down from the bench, then someone is screwing up.
Would also welcome any straws in the wind about Kayatta, as replacing him on the First Circuit is an easy win, but will require careful consultation with King and Collins.
LikeLike
If Kayatta goes senior, I think US Attorney Darcie McElwee is the most likely nominee since Collins has already vetted her.
LikeLiked by 1 person
McElwee is 50 & the coordinator of the Project Safe Neighborhoods. There are been several Biden nominees with that background so she definitely could be a top contender.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In my opinion, there’s really no excuse for any of the known circuit vacancies to be open by the end of the year. There are just too many SJC hearings and working weeks in the back half of the year for the WH and senate to slack.
That’s not to say it won’t happen. I’m sure some of those vacancies will drag on because of R senators or D senator disputes. Also could be absences. But there are ample opportunities to get fully caught up.
At worst, Bloomekatz, Ramirez, and de Alba need to be confirmed prior to the August recess.
LikeLike
Hard agree on both filling all outstanding vacancies by the end of 2023 and confirming Bloomenkatz, Ramirez and de Alba by the end of this month.
LikeLike
The second part of Biden’s first term is going to be much harder than the first. And it has nothing to do with who occupies the White House counsel position.
There are far more red state vacancies so there is going to be more back and forth negotiating. That is unless you want Biden to just accept whomever the red state Senator’s propose.
We are just going to have wait to find out who the the nominees will be,
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed that I highly doubt this WHC is even making an effort to get Clinton appointees to go senior (whereas the Trump admin definitely was with the Reagan appointees – Kanne being one example that didn’t work out), which is such an amateur mistake on their part. But if they can’t even get a nominee named for current vacancies, I guess I’m not surprised at their incompetence.
The idea that successful confirmations will prompt more retirements is grasping at straws at best (even though I would love for it to be true in order to give us some hope). I highly doubt a judge who cares enough about who replaces him or her politically would choose not to go senior at the beginning of Biden’s term, but instead wait for all the other vacancies to be filled first despite knowing how long these processes take.
The reality is that anyone who cares about being replaced by a Dem president who can go senior has already gone senior (with the exception of maybe Gregory because he wants to finish his turn as chief) – I honestly think the likes of Gould/Wardlaw just like being an active judge and don’t want to step back yet for (IMO selfish) personal reasons (I’d also add Moore, Clay, and maybe Stranch to this category too). Rovner could’ve gone senior for years now under either party and hasn’t, so she’ll likely do it until she dies, and Milan Smith on CA9 has pretty much said the same thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There are a lot of things that Donald Trump did that Joe Biden will not do. That is to ask judges of another branch of government to contemplate retirement in order to name their successors. It’s not going to happen.
We all know Trump was corrupt so why would Biden or anyone else working for him use his tactics. Methinks people want a left wing version of Trump like dictator.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Authoritarian is popular amongst the parts of both the left and right; you aren’t breaking new ground with that take. This site used to have a commenter, Shawn, who often openly evoked that sentiment much more so than anyone who currently is active.
LikeLike
The two of you are either willfully ignorant or actually blind if you think Fed Soc hasn’t been getting judges to retire strategically since its inception. Obama met with RBG to (unsuccessfully) convince her to retire while she could still be replaced with a sane person, so the idea that presidents don’t “ask judges of another branch to contemplate retirement” is straight up wrong.
That being said (and I will give credit to Biden for some decent nominees in the past that are clearly no longer happening), it’s clear that this White House lacks the spine to do anything but bring a knife to a gunfight with these despicable Republicans.
The fact that you think fighting back against Republican fascism is equivalent to authoritarianism shows what utter charlatans the two of you are.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I never made that take, I simply pointed out to that poster that he wasn’t breaking new ground with his argument. There are some authoritarians on the left, even though they have nowhere near the numbers nor influence as those on the right hold.
LikeLike
I disagreed with Obama trying to get RBG to prematurely retire, and I disagree with Trump trying to get COA judges to prematurely take senior status. I don’t think Biden is the type of president to pull such stunts, but only time will tell for sure.
LikeLike
I also disagree but I really wish RBG had prematurely retired. Hell, I even wish Jim Bunning was right about RBG if that’s what it would take to protect Roe v. Wade.
LikeLike
I will forever be upset and pissed off at the sheer hubris and ego which led to RBG thinking she could outlast Trump and especially at her for not retiring under Obama when she had a history of cancer. Not to mention the Roberts court carving out a decisively conservative path every term. She is one of the biggest reasons we have a 6-3 court, and EVERYTHING she fought for on the bench over 20 years is being reversed because of ego.
I’m not leaving Kennedy out of this blame game, and especially the 2014 voters for being the reason Obama couldn’t get 4 appointments to SCOTUS when Scalia’s heart couldn’t pump anymore crude oil through each chamber😔. Because of strategic missteps at every point in the 21st century (SCOTUS giving Bush the election, which lead to Roberts and Scalia) and various setbacks… we are in conservative dystopian hell, and I don’t see a way out unless a Dem president gets to replace Thomas. A SCOTUS of: Thomas/Roberts/Alito/Sotomayor/Kagan/Millett/Garland/Kavanaugh/Jackson… would have been MUCH better (goes without saying) but here we are *extremely deep sigh*
LikeLike
@dawsont825
Let’s not forget people saying “but her emails” in 2016 too. So many breaks that always seems to go against the Democrats. That’s just another reason why I want them to use power when they actually have it, including ending blue slips.
For the records even though I’m a hard liner when it comes to ending blue slips, believe it or not I actually would be in favor if I thought the other side would keep the same rules in play once they have power. Me wanting blue slips to end is rooted in my amount of trust I have in Republican hack senators. That amount is NONE
LikeLike
That sounds nice but your view will not win the day. It smacks of desperation and a lack of vision.
There’s no way either party will give away what’s left of their authority to the the executive branch.
To give away your bargaining power to get a handful of judges in a red states isn’t worth it. It’s not gonna happen!
LikeLike
Haaaaaaa
@shawnee68 exactly what evidence leads you to make such a bold prediction that Republicans would never take away blue slips?
Is it their adherence to precedent & norms up to this point? Perhaps it’s senator Graham’s promise not to do it? You know, the same same senator Graham that in 2016 said he would never hold a hearing, let alone vote on a SCOTUS nominee in an election year only to turn around & do it after votes had already been cast in an election 4 years later.
What world are you living in to even make a statement like that & then press send for the entire world to see? Not only CAN it happen, I would venture to say if you just go on recent history I would give it a good chance of happening.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How come they didn’t do it when they last had the chance to do so? It’s not bold at all. Do you see any indication from Durbin or Schumer that blue slips will go away? Of course not.
It’s folks like you and others who don’t have skin ion the game who are asking Senator’s to hand whatever authority left to another branch of government.
It’s not fair to put the nominee through a contentious confirmation process. How cynical can people be ? What about your obligation to the nominee?
You might want to stop thinking about yourself and how it affects the likes of you.
LikeLike
@shawnee68
I’ll be happy to answer all from both of your post.
It is not a cheap shot when you are using facts. If I said “RBG was too short to be a justice” that would be an example of a shot at her. Saying “RBG not stepping down while Democrats controlled the presidency & senate, & she was replaced by ACB” is not a shot, it’s a fact. And nobody is suggesting her decision is the sole reason the courts are where they are now. It’s one of the reasons.
As for why didn’t Republicans get rid of blue slips for district court seats before, I answered that this morning. They were in control for 4 years with Trump as president. In that time they got rid of the filibuster for SCOTUS & blue slips for circuit court seats. The next time they get into power the only thing left will be blue slips for district court seats. That combined with the senate Republican caucus being more conservative then it was in 2017 increase the likelihood of them getting rid of them next time.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s nice but they Durbin and Schumer and convinced of this. Why do you think you know better than them?
LikeLike
Durbin and Schumer was convinced Garland would get a hearing. Durbin and Schumer were convinced they could filibuster Gorshuch. Durbin and Schumer were convinced Al Fraken not turning in his blue slip followed by other Democrat senators would be enough to make Trump go back to the drawing board. Durbin and Schumer were convinced Republicans wouldn’t ram through a SCOTUS justice after votes had started in a presidential election. Durbin and Schumer are convinced an Alabama senator will drop his unprecedented hold on military promotions.
If you’re basing your opinion on what Durbin and Schumer think, no wonder you write some of the things you do. There record isn’t exactly perfect you know… Lol
LikeLike
Whether Schumer and Durbin are right or wrong about blue slips is besides the point. They are ones who have to make the decision. At this point it looks like they already have.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s my point. Their decision is possibly wrong. And if it’s based on the same assertion you have which is Republicans will never get rid of them, then I would say it’s rooted in misguided belief.
LikeLike
We don’t know what will happen. All I can say is that it isn’t happening anytime soon. That’s what it looks like from what I have read. Do you see anything that leads you to believe that something different are going to be going away?
LikeLike
Wait a minute… Now you’re saying “ that it isn’t happening anytime soon”. About a hour ago you proclaimed it will never happen. Damn, by the end of the week if you keep moving your position you might be to the left of me… Haaaaaa
LikeLike
Your anger is selectively misplaced. You should blame some of your friends on the left who voted for Trump. To blame a person who is no longer with us is mean and reflects a lack of class.
LikeLike
No matter if a person is living or dead doesn’t change the facts. RBG was a Supreme Court Justice. Their decisions & choices post confirmation are well within bounds to be discussed for all of eternity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a cheap shot. To blame where we are on one person is ridiculous . It’s also dishonest. You should go after your peers who voted for Trump or who did not vote. The votes where there but people didn’t like Clinton.
This notion that you have to like or personally approve of a presidential candidate is self defeating. You get someone like Trump who nearly destroyed the country but still caused millions of Americans to die.
How can people who don’t vote live with themselves? Perhaps they are too selfish to consider that they are the problem and not someone else.
LikeLike
why would people on the left vote for Trump? Sure, a lot of people on the left stayed home but I would imagine very few people on the left actually voted for Trump in the general election.
LikeLike
I came across several who did.
LikeLike
I think Kennedy was worse than RBG. RBG didn’t choose to die while Trump was president. Kennedy deliberately chose to retire while Trump was president.
On the bright side, it looks like Roberts is back in control of the court this term. The theory in the article below is that Roberts has convinced Kavanaugh & Barrett that they just need to sign on to his compromises and in return he will ensure that criticism against them doesn’t get too out of hand.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/06/john-roberts-supreme-court-kavanaugh-barrett-allies.html
Also, had Hillary won in 2016 and been re-elected in 2020, we might currently have a 3-3 Supreme Court (Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan), as Turtle & the GOP may have held the seats open, and the GOP would’ve gained 5-10 seats in 2018. Still would be better than our current Supreme Court smh
LikeLiked by 1 person
Also I expect the Supreme Court will get even worse if Roberts retires under a Republican… he’s the one keeping the current court at some level of sanity.
LikeLike
@shawnee68
Fun fact of the day: More “I’m with her” Hillary supporters voted for John McCain in 2008 than for Barack Obama than Bernie voters voted for Trump in 2016.
Your misplaced outrage at Bernie and “the left” is merely a deflection for your establishment shill being a weak general election candidate who lost to a reality TV star. Hillary alone is the biggest reason we got Trump and 3 SCOTUS nominees. You can BIG mad at the facts and seethe all you like, but if there were a better candidate, that person would’ve won.
And to your larger point on me being unfair to Ginsburg because she’s dead and we cannot disrespect the dead or talk ill of them. THAT’S MY POINT. She died at an inopportune time for the country. She and everyone else knew she was in poor health and it was only going to decline further. If you’re RBG and you spent your entire legal career fighting for women’s rights and to push federal law in a more progressive direction, the first chance you get to retire or step down under a likeminded administration… you do it without thinking. It is entirely possible her fault for the state of SCOTUS. 6-3 is the worst case scenario, but a 5-4 court is manageable.
I will forever be upset and blame her, and deep down, you know I’m right and she is to blame.
LikeLike
You see it was people like you who had some sort of hang-up with Hillary Clinton. You didn’t hurt her by sitting out. So, you can’t use RBG as a scapegoat.
This is not new we saw people like you in the 2000 election who voted for Ralph Nader.
Can you name a recent Democrat you can support? Or are you onboard with Cornell Wests’ reboot of the Nader 2000 campaign?
LikeLike
As I said in one of my previous posts, I held my nose and voted for Hillary in 2016 (but I should’ve known reading comprehension is not one of your strongest abilities) and this past election in the midst of COVID, I masked up and went to vote for Biden.
Once again since I have to break things down for you multiple times since you’re clearly a few standard deviations from the normal IQ… I AM NOT one of the voters that led to Trump winning in 2016. It was the two-time Obama voters who flipped to Trump and the rust belt true blue Dem voters who could not bring themselves to vote for her after what her husband did to them with NAFTA and PNTR with China. But of course you don’t have any smoke with them, you only want to punch down and blame young voters who actually have to live long-term with the policies that neolibs like Clinton/Obama implement while you all sit there clapping like dumbass seals.
The country writ large DOES NOT LIKE both parties and are seeking other alternatives to both corrupt and feckless parties. Eventually we will get multiple viable parties besides Dem/GOP, and I hope I can vote for them without giving the election to the GOP.
LikeLike
You say a lot of nothing. I know you wouldn’t say it if you in front of me. People like you can only talk but that’s cheap when it’s online.
You still haven’t said who is the Democrat you can support. I am sure others would like to know.
If you don’t like a two party system then why don’t you move to the UK? lol It sounds kind of nutty to say that people don’t like the party system. There’s nothing wrong with it other than that people are lazy.
There’s a reason why people come here to live and away from what they know. I think you ought to do the same and then we will see if your position changes. You will have to move out of mom and dad’s place but that would be good for you.
You may not been one of the voters who went for Trump but it was people who talk like you who did.
You sound quite angry for a privileged person.
LikeLike
I would say it right to your face in real life. Do not let the internet distance fool you, I still think you’re a moron and I have no issue saying that to you in real life, on this platform, on the moon, etc.
Of course your response is “if you don’t like it, leave” quite the fitting response from someone of your ilk.
Still clinging to that tired old narrative after all this time, it really must suck to be an old, past-your-prime, bitter individual. I genuinely feel sympathy for you. Do and be better.
Your small-minded mentality is the reason a lot of older Dems just accept what the modern Dem party has become. Good thing is your kind and generation is soon dying out so we can have some genuine change soon.
Coming from someone who has played an instrumental role shilling for the party, I really am curious how you’re not happy with the state of the modern Democratic Party. Looks like openly shilling doesn’t get you anywhere besides washed up and bitter. Build a bridge and get over it.
LikeLike
Mitch & company definitely was nudging judges to retire before 2020. I’m just thankful Pence idiotic reasoning led to Kanne to withdraw. While I know we are frustrated we still don’t have a nominee for the 7th, even a full garbage can in Times Square would be better then who they were gonna nominate to replace Kanne. I wish it was Jessica Eglin but I’ll be happy just to eventually get a nominee & the seat filled, hopefully along with both district court vacancies as well.
LikeLike
You’re right. In my anger at some of the centrist nominees from Biden who replaced solid liberals on the circuit court, anyone Biden picks to replace Kanne will be a million times better than him. Especially since that will be Biden’s 3rd or 4th appointee to that conservative-leaning circuit court.
It would be nice to get it out of the way so Biden can focus his attention to filling some of the longshot district court seats in Alabama, Missouri, Utah, Wyoming, etc.
Getting a solid moderate vote to replace a FedSoc hack is always a plus, just the time it takes is so long… ugh.
LikeLike
I’m not mad at left of center circuit court nominees. I’m mad when they come with no package deals to fill all of the district court vacancies in the state. Had Irma Ramires been nominated along with at least 5 of the district court seats too, I wouldn’t be as upset. And all five should be Democrats, even centrist but no Republicans when we get such a bad circuit court judge out of it.
If all this waiting for the 7th & 10th leads to the 2 & 1 respectively district court seats getting filled with Democrats for all seats then it’s worth the wait. If any of the district court seats are filled with Republicans then I expect to see Jessica Eglin & Lauren Bonds as the circuit court nominees… Lol
LikeLike
Yes, you are hiding behind your computer. I can honestly say that no one especially someone your age has walked up on me.lol I am a nice guy but people know better.
I mold school we did not have internet so if you had to say something it was to their face.
I don’t know what you mean by “shilling.” The reason why most black people are democrats is that we see them as the best alternative to anything else out there.
A privileged person like you wouldn’t know anything about something like that. We still don’t know who you have in mind for President?
I am not angry at all. The person who I wanted got elected. He’s done a lot for black people that hasn’t been done before. However, if there weren’t any dems before we couldn’t have the nominees that we have today.
You make much of older dems but that covers most of the Senate. The younger dems are not mature enough to win statewide races. We saw that with Mandela Barnes . He choked because he was at certain times criticizing the current president of the same party.
Lastly, if you want to see how younger folks can wreck a city . You should see San Francisco the radical left has laws with no teeth and businesses are being looted on a daily basis. I’m not talking about Target either . In some cases it’s black owned businesses getting ripped off over night. The latte liberals on the board of supervisors has made San Francisco a crime magnet with it’s feckless policies on policing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Spoken like a true shit-lib. Nothing more can be said about your mentality than has already been said. You’ve made your basic ass points clear in all your responses.
You’re not even worth walking up on lmaoooo, who the hell do you think you are? No one gives a flying fuck who you are or about your stance on internet discourse versus stuff said in person. No one would walk up on you because no one gives a fuck about you or two cents. Lmao, this guy. I say this behind a screen because I am currently behind a screen, unless you would like to change that. But you’re not even worth the time, pure red herring and a deflection from the issues.
We can tell you’re old school. Your mentality, your use of the “this or that” fallacy and other noticeable things lead us to gather that you are indeed old school and stuck in your ways. Guess you’re the first person to be wrong and strong, give this guy a medal.
“Radical left” ?? :O did you just use a republican phrase?? Oh no, that makes you no better than a right-winger *shawnee68 logic* you see how stupid that sounds? Or did I just speak your exact language?
Of course you cling to the one notable senate race a young Dem lost, conveniently leaving out the fact that he came closer to winning that Senate seat than the last 2 nominees who faced Johnson (it was Feingold both times, but still), also while just *quietly* sweeping under the rug the copious number of right-wing Dem senators that lost either re-election, or got their asses handed to them in the general. I guess you and your Blue MAGA types are still expecting to see a Sen. Amy McGrath or a Sen. Jamie, Harrison, or a Sen. Val Demings. or a Sen. Sara Gideon. I could keep going, but for every opportunity we miss out on, you establishment shills are losing winnable races and are blaming others for YOUR failures. Facts don’t care about your feelings old man.
My ideal person for President? Not someone who has been decades in Washington D.C., all that coziness and “D.C brain” isn’t good. Someone young and with an actual left ideology. So not Biden, Hillary, Kamala, Newson, etc.
If you’re content with eating the crumbs that Biden and his neoliberal friends throw off the table for you, then feel free to eat them and thank massa for what he allowed you to get. But you see, that’s the difference between you and people my age who see the crumbs being dropped and the door to the bakery right there. Eat your crumbs and be quiet like the good little shill you are. Good, don’t notice as we fatten the Pentagon with more money (even though they fail audits 5 years in a row) and continue to let Big Pharma fuck Americans raw while Dems like you sit back and tell them “it could be worse”. That’s the difference between me and you. Your old school mentality tells you to be content and get what you can, while I and others my age keep our eyes on the prize.
Miss me with your shilling, I fully reject your mentality and everything that comes with it.
LikeLike
At first I wasn’t a big Newson fan but he has grown on me over the past couple years. He is doing many of the things I have said Democrats should be doing more of. That includes going on Fox News & confronting lies head on, using power when you have power, going after leaders from other states & other things.
I am not a fan of everything Newson. I don’t like lockdowns, especially when you yourself are caught not abiding by then. I think he should be a little more reasonable on immigration too. And I definitely think he can be better on judges, albeit when you come directly after Jerry Brown, nobody probably could look good on judges. But I definitely would be fine with him as well as Whitmer or Moore in 2028.
LikeLike
Florida had a higher mortality rate on COVID than California.
LikeLike
I don’t like my governor Ron DeSantis at all so you won’t catch me defending him or any of his policies… Lol
LikeLike
Ever since I saw Newsom in that wine cave with Mayo Pete during the 2020 primaries, I knew then that he was cut from the same elitist cloth as the other wealthy and neoliberal Dems. I definitely can appreciate him for being just as antagonistic to the GOP as the GOP is to liberals, so I definitely enjoy knowing that he would have the balls to stick it to the GOP in judicial appointments and other things. I’m not as against him as I am Mayo Pete or Kamala Harris, but if he becomes President, I’ll be indifferent and hope he picks someone really good as his VP.
My way of thinking is pretty straight forward when it comes to my criticism of Gov. Newsom, with a gigamajority (not supermajority, yes, their majorities in the state house and senate are that massive) in both chambers of the California legislature, is he pushing through and advocating for unapologetically left/progressive ECONOMIC policies. Liberals and Centrists can virtue signal till the cows come home over social issues and culture war issues, but when push comes to shove, does he have the backbone to fight for economic issues which affect the lives of the common Californian? Unfortunately, the answer is no. He made a specific pledge to try to push through a state version of Medicare For All (I think it was going to be called CalCare, but don’t quote me on that) and when the usual pharma donors and lobbyists made a few phone calls and applied pressure, the bill was never passed. No excuse either.
So overall, I think he would be a good President, but the country is clamoring for genuine change, I don’t think he has the ability to bring about that change.
Interested in what Moore does in Maryland over the next 4 years and beyond, would love for him to be VP one day and eventually President one day.
Also, forgive me for not being as conversant with California state judges, but what is the difference between former Gov. Brown’s judges and Newsom?
LikeLike
I can’t speak on Newsom when it comes to health care in the state but I can definitely talk about judges. Jerry Brown put progressive & liberal justices on the SCOT-CA & even younger & more progressive judges in the lower courts. I’m not an expert in all governors judicial appointments but from what I’ve seen, Jerry Brown is the best I’ve ever seen. New Jersey governor Murphy is phenomenal as well & that’s with the bs partisan balance rule NJ has.
Newsom has been good on judges but definitely not great. His first appointment was a LGBT Black man which is good but he was in his 60’s. His next appointment & then chief Justice was a left of center Latina. There were many more progressive Latinas to pick. His most recent pick was a LGBT Black woman so once again good but she was near her mid 50’s so again there were much younger options, even if you kept the same category of LGBT and/or a Black woman.
So there is a difference between Brown & Newsom on judges. Newsom is good but Brown was spectacular.
LikeLike
You still haven’t said who you for President. You won’t say because you know that person can’t be elected. If my points are clear then how come you won’t answer them?
A privileged person like yourself with all of the trappings of family wealth and you are resorting to profanity.
Does your mom still make your bed? It doesn’t sound like you have “adulted” properly. You haven’t moved out your parent’s house.
You mention democrats in red states who didn’t win. So what? The last time I checked Wisconsin isn’t a red state. The Governor who is not know to be charismatic won his race in the same election.
Al Gore lost the presidency by 537 votes so that doesn’t mean anything. Losing is losing. I don’t know how old you are but there’s a reason why people your age aren’t elected. At least one reason is that you have to move of your parent’s house.
It sounds like you have a lot growing up to do. I wish you luck in your endeavors!
LikeLike
@shawnee68
“Some sort of hang-up”?? She was one of the most unlikeable and openly corrupt nominees in the history of presidential politics. Just to be clear here, I held my nose and voted for her even though I hated everything about her, but only because I wanted to see Scalia’s seat filled.
Quick side note, since you failed to refute the point about Bernie/Trump and Hillary/McCain voters, I’m gonna take that W and finally silence your incessant bullsh*t blaming the “left” for not voting for Hillary
Your beef is not with the Gen-Z activists, it’s with the normal Democratic voters who could not bring themselves to vote for her, and for the two-time Obama voters that switched to vote for Trump after not having any substantial economic improvement under 8 years of the neolib-in-command Pres. Obama. THAT is where the election was won for Trump and lost for Hillary. And yet again, that falls on the DNC for pushing her through when it was clear she wasn’t popular, and on Hillary for having the hubris and feeling as if she were entitled to the presidency. Hillary’s inability to read the electorate, and RBG’s ego are the reason we’re here. No deflecting from you will change that. You can be mad, but it is what it is at this point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have been Democratic vote perhaps longer than you have been alive. I’ve seen or heard of Democrat’s attacking their own nominees.
For you to say that rank and file Dems think you is entirely ridiculous. You sound like someone off of Fox News with their conspiracy rants.
The problem with malcontents like you is that you don’t offer any solutions. You won’t because you can’t.
Yes, it was the left and Sanderites like you that took down Hillary because you didn’t like her. After 4 years of Trump you are whining about a candidate’s likeability.
The truth is there’s no Democrat out there that’s suitable for you. That’s my issue with people like you there’s nothing anyone can say or do to appease you. As if in a nation of 300 million people someone will emerge from the clouds and you will like that person.
LikeLike
Nice of you to show your age, get with the times old man.
You’re really one of the densest and
dumbest commentors here, I wish aangren would save some of that smoke he has with Frank for you. Cause you definitely deserve it with your batshit crazy takes.
Any criticism of rank-and-file Dems is akin to what you hear on Fox News? Jesus *facepalm* lay off the blue Kool-Aid and be objective about things sometimes. Oops, that’s impossible for you. How embarrassing to be so mature and old and still possess such a juvenile way of thinking. I am embarrassed for you. Yikes
After all my explaining and careful commentary, you still cling to that tired ass narrative like an old person scared to change their ways, how fitting. You just can’t get over the fact that your “yass kween” candidate sucked (and not good enough to keep Bill from needing more) and was a horrible general election candidate. It’s ok to be hurt years later, eventually reality will hit for you… lolololol nevermind, it never hits for people as intellectually dense as you.
There are plenty of Democrats suitable out there for me and the other hundreds of thousands/millions of Gen-Z and millennial voters which would dig the modern Dem party out of the electoral pit they dug themselves into with Boomers/Gen-X/and the Silent generation. All we want is a candidate who is down to earth and is willing to fight for grassroots issues that affect millions of Americans every day. Instead, along with treating the opposition party like the clear and present danger to our way of life as we know it…. we got a snobby, corrupt, unlikeable woman in Hillary and as a result, SCOTUS is the way it is and the results speak for themselves.
If you can’t look in the mirror (without breaking it) and come to realize YOU and your establishment shilling voters gaslighting each other into believing someone else is to blame for your fuck-up… then there isn’t hope for you at all. Suck it up buttercup.
LikeLike
Most of the judges who wanted to make sure a Democrat replaced them both
1) announced senior status sometime in 2021
2) waited for the confirmation of their successor before assuming senior status
LikeLike
Regarding the 2016 election, many voters perceived Trump to be a pretty moderate candidate, so I could definally see shawnee being right on some left leaning voters pulling the trigger for him.
LikeLike
What about Kent Jordan on the 3rd, James Loken on the 8th, and Harris Hartz on the 10th? They’re pretty moderate for being Republican nominees.
LikeLike
I think “moderate Republican” and “willing to retire under a Dem president” have very little overlap. Hartz and Loken have been able to go senior for ages (under administrations by both parties) and haven’t – they strike me as the “doing this until I die” crowd like Rovner (and Gibbons on CA6 too). Jordan’s younger so it’s more possible, but I wouldn’t hold my breath since Fed Soc was pretty entrenched in the selection by Bush II.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it’s a long shot too, but if even 1-2 circuit judges do it then it’ll have been worth it. I can definitely see it with Kayatta for example since the First has had so much turnover and so many vacancies. Rovner and the 7th as well. Once those are all filled I can see how it might prompt some reflection.
Of course everyone see it differently though, and Rovner and Kayatta might take the opposite approach.
LikeLike
I agree with others that Rovner will stay on until she literally can’t. Kayatta is a different case though, I honestly could see him going either way and it wouldn’t shock me.
LikeLike
Kayatta doesn’t become eligible until October 27, so he might announce in the next few months.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep. If he does take senior status, I’d expect him to announce it shortly beforehand.
LikeLike
The Republican attempt to get GOP appointed circuit judges to take senior status was a complete failure.
At best they got to replace 1 judge (Thomas Griffith) who said his retirement was to spend more time with family. Trump filled only 5 circuit court vacancies in 2020 and 3 of them were announced before 2020 (the other 2 were Griffith’s seat & Justice Barrett’s old seat). Joel Flaum announced senior status in 2020 but the GOP failed to fill his seat in time — Turtle decided it was more important to prevent a timely trial for Trump’s 2nd impeachment than get a few extra judges confirmed.
LikeLike
@Ryan your analysis is incomplete if you only look at 2020 – the Trump admin clearly was trying to get conservative judges to go senior before then. The article on Kane even explicitly says so: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/12/mike-pence-kanne-judge-trump-1411915.
I checked, and Trump started with 17 appellate vacancies and ended up filling 54 – meaning at least 37 judges went senior or retired during his 4 years. The odds of all 37 just realizing they suddenly wanted to spend more time with family in the same time period are about as likely as Alito turning down a free private jet flight from a right-wing billionaire.
LikeLike
Didn’t realize it was happening before 2020. Didn’t hear about it until the spring of 2020 (during covid lockdown)
LikeLike
In 2017-18 and even 2019, many took senior status for ideological reasons. So I suppose Trump prodding them could help secure their decision to step down.
LikeLike
Yeah private phone calls to judges to ask them to go senior isn’t something that makes the news (except when it goes off the rails like with Kanne). I’m sure the Republican appointees were more receptive to Trump’s calls than many of the Clinton/Obama appointees—Gould in particular is pretty centrist—but that’s more reason for this administration to be doing even more to get Dem appointees to go senior.
For example, Holly Thomas was a Wardlaw clerk – if the administration was planning on picking her anyways, letting Wardlaw know ahead of time that her vacancy would be occupied by a former clerk would’ve had some sway (as it did with Kanne). Missed opportunity by the administration there.
LikeLike
I’ve been going back and forth on the issue for a while because it’s easy to do one thing when you have the power, but then it’s foolhardy to not think about a future time when you won’t have the power and you’re at the mercy of a ruthless other side. With that said, I think blue slips should be revised so that only one is needed per state to move forward with a SJC hearing and subsequent votes. Will that be unbeneficial when there is a GOP President, GOP senate majority, and a Dem senator caves to a right-of-center nominee/FedSoc hack?? ABSOLUTELY. But as we hear often times: “elections have consequences” (no, this is not the time to argue about SCOTUS, we have had so many other discussions about that)
Colom would be confirmed by now if Durbin just slightly altered the blue slip process, instead of allowing a southern racist meemaw like Hyde-Smith to block him for bullsh*t reasons. The slight altering of the law would help to get nominees in general to every court. It would absolutely suck to potentially have a FedSoc hack sit on the district court based in Maine because Angus King caved, or the immortal Susan Collins capitulated to pressure from McConnell. On the bright side, it would help pave the way for Biden to get good nominees in Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky by appealing to the good nature of ONE senator in the state (the most reasonable). And if they both are playing hardball and won’t recommend anyone after engaging in negotiations for months, THAT is all the proof you need to scrap them altogether. The president and matching senate majority should be able to fill vacancies for political reasons and for logistical reasons (fewer active judges puts more undue stress and workload on the other active judges… causing more burnout, less well-thought-out decisions, etc.,)
Realistically, Biden should be able to negotiate with every senator for their home-state vacancy and expect a list of names within 4 months as to keep the nomination and confirmation process rolling along. Unfortunately, with the overt politization of the courts, Biden is unlikely to even nominate someone to the court without a hack senator refusing to return their blue slip. Change the policy now. No single senator should hold up the senate’s important work (looking hard at you football coach).
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the 1 senator rule would be good especially given how few split delegations remain (I could see the GOP adopting the 1 senator rule during their control if a Dem won a senate seat in Texas).
LikeLike
I honestly don’t think that would solve the problem. If they adopted a one blue slip rule, the other senator in red states simply would refuse to turn their blue slips in even if they are good with the nominee just in solidarity for their fellow colleague. I believe that to be the case even for Scott Colom. A senator could publicly say they approve of a nominee but refuse to turn their blue slips in because their fellow senator doesn’t approve. That change would probably make things worst. Either get rid of them altogether or just be resigned to the fact that you’re not gonna fill some red seats.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s a good point. I think many Republicans would do that, thus this would only work in the 5 states that have split delegations (and really this plan would only be useful in 2 states, Montana & Wisconsin)
LikeLike
I think some of the prolonged vacancies have little to do with politics. In Montana, the state’s two U.S. Senators do not get along at all. That, more than anything else, is gumming up the works there.
LikeLike
I suspect Steve Daines is still angry about Johnstone being confirmed.
LikeLike
In South Dakota, all three of the U.S. District Judges are Democrats appointed by Obama. I’ll bet that the Senators are pushing for a Republican to be one of the two nominees.
Also, the Chairman of the South Dakota Democratic Party, which made recommendations for Federal Judges, suddenly died of a heart attack and that may have slowed things down.
LikeLike
As for Western Arkansas, I expect that the nod will go to Magistrate Judge Christy Comstock. She’d be a Democrat who could get confirmed with little trouble.
LikeLike
Why do you expect that Arkansas will get a nominee for that district court seat, particularly a Democrat, when the senators and Biden haven’t even been able to agree on attorney nominees?
LikeLike
One of the Senators from Arkansas stated that he and his colleague have had good discussions with the White House. That implies that a compromise candidate is possible.
LikeLike
That may be true, but if they can’t agree on positions which are not for life, color me skeptical that they will agree on who should be picked for a lifetime position. The only way I see that seat being filled is if the Biden administration is willing to pick someone from the Federalist Society.
LikeLike
If anybody wants the link on Wikipedia to chime in to get this “Let’srun” idiot form not being able to pull all of the judicial nominees pages down, here it is below.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#AFD_and_judges_appointed_by_Joe_Biden)
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Dequan
Tiffany Cartwright got reinstated because she’s going to be voted on in a few days.
LikeLike
The rationale for pulling her page down was nominees are not notable until they are confirmed. She hasn’t been confirmed yet so that rationale is as much bs today as it was the day it got approved.
LikeLike
Her article just got taken down again.
LikeLike
Yup. You can see on the Wikipedia thread I sent to everybody here to add their comments on why. I used her article being put back as a justification that you need to edit until confirmation to be notable is bs (I said it much nicer on Wikipedia). There was a long back & fourth so they took her page back down because they were losing the argument with it back up.
LikeLike
RBGs thought process was insane, not sure how anyone could dispute that after all we know. She deserves the criticism she gets and it’s not like we have to read the tea leaves to know what her thought process was. She was quite explicit across multiple interviews.
She wanted to be the longest serving Jewish justice in history and was convinced that Obama would never be able to nominate a justice as good as her (even after the senate rules changes). She also had her favorite painting on a museum tour and wanted to see it back in her chambers before she retired. Again, her words, not my conjecture.
Instead of getting justice Millett or Garland we now have Amy Coney Barrett and we are all stuck with the consequences.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The truth is people have been getting lazy. Instead of voting in every election people having been slacking off thinking that courts would protect them. It worked for awhile but not anymore.
If you’re looking for the perfect person to be president you won’t find him or her. You have look at what kind of judges you will get. It’s too bad that people fail to understand this. After a few more years of the Robert’s court this lesson will be learned.
LikeLike
Okay, if it makes you feel good and it helps you sleep at night attacking a person who is no longer with us.
What else do you expect that will get you? It sounds nuttier than Trump complaining about a stolen election 3 years later.
LikeLike
No argument there. People absolutely need to vote.
LikeLike
There are a couple of vacancies in Oklahoma. A name to watch is Bobby Bell, a well-liked state Appellate Judge. He wouldn’t make history, but he’s a Democrat who would be easily confirmed.
LikeLike
Is he liked by Republicans though? That is what really matters in a red state with two Republican senators, who just like Arkansas haven’t even been able to agree on U.S. Attorney nominees. Just like Arkansas, I’m highly skeptical the seat will be filled unless the Biden administration is willing to put forward someone from the Federalist Society.
LikeLike
*seats
LikeLike
I would say Arkansas no, if the blue slip won’t be changed, alone because Tom Cotton is the home state senator.
Surely Frank is right, all states with two Republican senators, who, especially with more than one district, have not even an U.S. Attorney now, are likely rely on obstructionism.
Oklahoma is also such a case.
But as I noted above, trying to keep them open for a longer time would be risky, in the case that Judge Fritzell also take senior, there just Judge Heil remaining, who also sits at the ED and the WD. In the other two it’s unlikely, that another vacancy arise, even in a potential second term of Biden. And there are two vacancies, which would make a deal easier.
LikeLike
Happy about this post being published (as I predicted it would just this week to the impatient Mitch haha) but I haven’t gotten a chance to read it yet. Nor have I read any of the nearly 100 comments yet, and I don’t think I can get to all.
But I wanted to share this to all the judicial division absolutists out there. The article is paywalled and I don’t have a subscription, but the preview provides enough information:
https://www.pennlive.com/news/2023/06/federal-judge-nominee-will-sit-in-scranton-rather-than-where-vacancy-exists.html
Sorry if this was already posted. I hate duplicated postings.
LikeLike
@Gavi
Here is the article without the paywall so you can read it.
(https://archive.is/4LHhH)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nice, is that the archive method you mentioned a while back? It doesn’t always work, does it? I remember you not being able to view other paywalled articles.
LikeLike
It almost always work but there something you have to do to some of the articles in order for it to work. It’s not just always copy & paste but this article was so it was easy to get most aren’t as easy though for some reason…lol
LikeLike
Right. There’s a long history of moving chambers or divisions. Some judges have moved their chambers clear across the country on occasions.
LikeLike
If Scranton needs the judgeship more, then they should get it. My issue is when people argue to move the seat just so they can have someone perceived as more liberal or conservative on the court in question.
LikeLike
@Frank
I am definitely one of the people that argue for moving seats if it means getting who you want. There’s nothing in the constitution that says a certain city in a state had to have a certain number of judges. So for instance if a judge retired on the 2nd circuit from Buffalo & Biden wanted to nominate Dale Ho from Manhattan then so be it. I want the president to pick the best person regardless of what city they live in.
See @Gavi, when it comes to duty stations I agree with you on affirmative action… Haaaaaaa
LikeLike
@Harsh: Can you please let us know the policy for blocking posts? I wrote on the last thread about the affirmative action ruling and pointed out that it shows the importance of what we’re all concerned about here, the appointment of judges. No profanity, no name calling, and yet it got blocked. Any reason?
LikeLike
@rayspace
I doubt your post was blocked. Unfortunately on this blog sometimes when you post links it doesn’t post for some reason. Earlier this week I wrote a lengthy response to @Gavi & posted 4 links at the bottom & it didn’t send. I resent the exact same post without the 4 articles & it sent right away. I was so mad… Haaaaaa
LikeLike
I agree with Dequan. Definitely not “blocked,” just probably super delayed. Posts with more than one link will also not be published, but that’s more of a glitch than an active block.
LikeLike
@Ethan had mentioned after the blog had that major glitch when nobody could post for about 3 weeks another platform to possibly switch to. I’m not good with technology so I can’t speak much on the subject but maybe Harsh can look into it if we can’t get this glitch fixed.
LikeLike
I had suggested Substack. Much better comment section.
LikeLike
Very very good article on judge Newman.
(https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/judge-96-mourns-tarnished-legacy-while-saying-she-wont-leave?source=newsletter&item=body-link®ion=text-section)
LikeLike
Thank you for sharing.
LikeLike
I thought it read like a movie. Judge Alan Lourie going to Newman’s house to deliver her the message. Interesting they both live at Watergate.
LikeLike
Thanks for sharing that article.
It is a very sad situation. Another reminder to us all that it really is best to go out at the top of your profession rather than cling to it. Newman puts on a good front for the media but clearly there is a lot going on here behind the scenes
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks @Dequan @Gavi @Ethan, but none of these probablys fits. There were as many links in my post as there are current 8th Circuit nominees, so no go there. Don’t know why it would have been delayed when my query here (asking about the policy) posted right away. That would seem to indicate a delay policy based on something, but not clear what. Just trying to find out.
LikeLike
Haaaaaaa
I’ll make a deal with the you. I’ll personally re-type & send word for word everything you posted if you get me a vacancy on the 8th. Preferably before the end of the year because if it’s after new years it probably wouldn’t get filled… Lol
LikeLike
Things more likely than a voluntary retirement/senior status in the 8th Circuit:
*Elvis returns for a comeback concert
*Mitch McConnell says “Let’s have more voice votes on Biden’s judicial nominees.”
*Any Republican Member of Congress says “there is systemic racism in the U.S. and we have to do something about it”
*Print newspapers become all the rage
LikeLike
@rayspace
Haaaaaaaa… Youron a roll today. I think blocking/IT glitches your post has brought out your comedic side… Lol
LikeLike
Here is a link to view judge jeffery hopkins investiture one of the black men nominated by biden to a red state district seat. I have to say credit to rob portman he worked in good faith. Jeffrey hopkins age aside is a decent nominee and certainly earn it after a long time as a bankruptcy judge. If this was the level of corporation across for all states, i would have no issue with retaining blue slips.
LikeLike
Senator Portman was very fair when it came to judges. He is an example of why I want blue slips ditched. He was fair & now he is gone. He was replaced with a senator who is blocking all US attorney’s (Not just his state) because he doesn’t like a DOJ policy. Yet we are expecting him to work in good faith when it comes to Ohio nominees like Portman did.
LikeLike
I’m going to speculate on the Nebraska vacancy. I think th4e first choice of the White House is Yvonne Sosa, but I don’t think the Senators found her acceptable.
LikeLike
the most likely pick for the Nebraska seat in my opinion is Andre Barry, a Partner at Cline Williams. He hasn’t made many political donations but the few he has made were to Democrats. @Dequan said he reminded him of Stephen Locher in Iowa. https://www.clinewilliams.com/attorneys/andre-r-barry.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
You may be right. Andre Barry specializes in IP law, which doesn’t fall along ideological lines. Also, he hasn’t made any donations in a while. If his legal writings and speeches aren’t controversial, his chances are good.
LikeLike
@Mitch, Barry has made three federal political donations (none since 2012). Not sure about state donations since they’re reported differently in each state:
-2012: $250 to Bob Kerrey for Senate.
-2012: $500 to Obama.
-2008: $300 to Obama.
LikeLike
The Maryland vacancy on the Fourth Circuit surprises me. I can only speculate. But I think that the Biden Administration wants a progressive from D.C. on the court and Ben Cardin wants someone from Maryland, with roots there. Perhaps Cardin is pushing for Judge Stephanie Gallagher, whom he thinks highly of.
LikeLike
Honestly, if Gallagher is Cardin’s preferred pick then I think it’s slightly ridiculous that the WH hasn’t agreed to it already. She’s a relatively young, reliably liberal District Judge and she can also flaunt the fact that Trump nominated her for her current seat, which might peel off a couple more Republicans than the usual suspects.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t see anything in Stephanie Gallagher‘s background that shows she’s liberal, progressive or anything more than barely left of center. We should not be getting centrist for ANY circuit court seats, let alone when they are in blue states. And she’s in her 50’s. There are many more progressive choices that are in their 40’s.
Gallagher would be amongst Biden’s worst circuit court picks if she was the nominee for the 4th. She would be better than Ramirez & probably Childs but she would be down in that category.
LikeLike
That’s my guess too Mitch
LikeLike
That’s exactly what myself & @Ethan were discussing a while back. Cardin probably pushed for Stephanie Gallagher while Biden wanted a DC nominee since it’s right across the river. I’m assuming Biden’s choice is more progressive. They need to figure this out. It’s behind inexcusable at this point.
LikeLike
I learned something about Brandon Long, the nominee for District Court of Eastern Louisiana. He’s friends with Damien Diggs, the U.S. Attorney for Eastern Texas. They worked in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in D.C.
LikeLike
I know a lot of people are dooming about the 3rd Circuit Vacancy and everything saying the liveliest nominees are Julian Neals and Ester Salas and everything but tbh I think they’re are more notable picks in the state with more clout in the NJ legal sphere than those two. Honestly I think Fabiana Pierre-Lewis of the NJ Supreme Court is the liveliest pick. If nothing else she’d keep the “young black woman on the Circuit Court” trend going but she’s also both fairly young and pretty well respected and qualified. Honestly even someone like former NJ ttorney general and current SEC director Gurbir Grewal I think wouldn’t be that surprising since he’s decently young at 50, would be the first Sikh on the Circuit Courts and who’s career isn’t super controversial or ideological. Idk I just think people do I a bit too much dooming about the potential pick with people thinking it’s going to be someone like Christine O’Hearn.
LikeLike
I’m wondering about the vacancy in Alaska? I’d think that the Biden Administration would defer to Lisa Murkowski on it. She’s the most bipartisan Senator in the chamber.
She had recommended Eric Aarseth of the Anchorage Supreme Court a few years ago, but Trump chose someone younger and more conservative Aarseth retired from the bench last year, so I don’t know who she favors.
LikeLike
Considering that Dan Sullivan asked to interview all candidates interviewing for the 9th circuit, I doubt we will see a nominee for that seat until the next Republican president is elected.
LikeLike
@Frank
Exactly, this is an example of why I want to get rid of blue slips. I’m sure the administration could work out a consensus nominee for Alaska with Murkowski. They would work in good faith to get a nominee with the senior senator who is a Republican. But with blue slips, a senator who thinks he should be able to interview all 9th circuit nominees from other states can block a nominee even if the administration works with Murkowski.
It’s insane if you really think about it. Republicans thought so too which is why they got rid of them for circuit court seats.
LikeLike
I’m wondering about the two District Court vacancies in Western North Carolina? I’ve speculated with @Dequan that since the state Court of Appeals has an 11-4 Republican majority, Democrats might agree to appoint one of them to District Court so the Democratic Governor could replace that judge.
State Appellate Judge April Wood is from the Western District. Does anyone else here think that could happen?
LikeLike
Hmmmmm… As long as there are blue slips, Republicans incentive to try & get the worst possible nominee as they can. And that’s if they have an incentive to get a nominee at all. That’s the problem with blue slips, there is no incentive.
LikeLike
There have been multiple vacancies in Indiana. The state’s two Republican Senators have worked in good faith with the Biden Administration and they found acceptable nominees. Both sides claim they want this to continue.
There are three vacancies remaining, two for District Court in Northern Indiana. It’s clear that Magistrate Judge Mario Garcia will get appointed to one of the vacancies, but which one? I don’t think the Senators would support him for the 7th Circuit.
One possible compromise candidate for the Circuit is District Judge Damon Leichty, a Democrat appointed in 2019 as part of a bipartisan package.
AUSA David Hollar has been named and he’s a viable choice for one of the vacancies. But his prosecution of a local sheriff drew a sharp rebuke from an appeals judge.
LikeLike
@Mitch
Yea I completely agree. @Ethan has also mentioned both names you have as well. I do hope the administration pushes hard for Marci Garcia for the 7th though. Even if we have to get a more centrist nominee for one for the two district court seats that would be fine (As long as it’s not a straight up Republican).
The 7th is one of the few remaining circuits that has never had a Hispanic judge. I know there are two Illinois judges that can go senior at any time, but both are Republican appointees so no guaranteed even in a second Biden term.
LikeLike
@Frank, @Dequan, @ Mitch:
I would hope Senator Sullivan would agree to former Alaska Attorney General Jahna Lindemuth (born 1969). She is an Independent but was appointed by a Republican Governor but also helped innocent people gain their freedom.
LikeLike
@Ethan
Jahna Lindemuth is a very interesting option. Has she shown interest in becoming a judge?
LikeLike
That background of freeing the innocent probably wouldn’t fly with Sullivan, since most conservatives, including many Republicans in the Senate, believe that everyone in prison is guilty. Just look at Nina Morrison’s SJC hearing if you need a remember. If I remember correctly, isn’t the governor for Alaska (blanking on his name now) somewhat more moderate than Sullivan as well?
LikeLike
Sullivan is a moderate on some issues, he voted for the Respect for Marriage Act, voted to confirm Deb Haaland, & voted for the infrastructure bill.
However, he isn’t moderate on judges. First, his bogus request to meet with all 9th circuit nominees (even worse, he chose Josh Hawley to be his Judiciary Committee messenger). Second, Trump refused to nominate Aarseth despite Murkowski wanting him, suggesting Sullivan didn’t want him either — I don’t think Trump would have the balls to refuse a nominee supported by 2 GOP senators (though Murkowski voted to confirm Joshua Kindred, the younger more conservative pick).
LikeLike
Is it just me or am I not the only one that laughs every time I think of Sullivan’s demand that he gets to meet with every 9th circuit nominee before being nominated? Like that alone should have been enough for Durbin to strip him if his blue slips… Haaaaaaa
LikeLike
Other Republican senators have done worse. I also have a few other lingering questions that only Sen. Sullivan can answer:
1) Do you plan on having meaningful conversation with each 9th circuit nominee you meet with or do you just want to scream at them about how they are too liberal to be a judge?
2) Do you already know how you are going to vote on the nominee before you meet with them?
3) How long do you want to meet with each nominee?
4) If you get your wish, how many other Republican senators will ask to meet with all nominees from their home circuit court?
LikeLike
@Ryan Joshi
I haven’t met with senator Sullivan but I can still answer all of your questions.
1. Scream
2. Yes, the same way I was going to vote before meeting them & that’s NO.
3. My calendar seems to be a little busy at the moment. Let’s schedule the meeting sometime around January 20, 2025. I see I’m free all day then.
4. All Republican senators.
Hope that cleared to all your questions… Lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sounds about right.
LikeLike
Yeah I think the AK governor Dunleavy is more moderate than Sullivan, given that Trump gave him a conditional endorsement (the condition being that he not endorse Murkowski). Thus, Sullivan is the most conservative of Alaska’s 4 key statewide elected officials (himself, Murkowski, Peltola, Dunleavy)
LikeLike
@Frank. The only time she worked to free innocent people was the case of the “Fairbanks Four”. Doubt that alone would stop Sullivan from supporting her. https://www.tananachiefs.org/fairbanks-four-timeline/
LikeLike
Thought this WH Press release would be of interest to some people here. Nothing earth shattering, but an interesting recap nonetheless
LikeLike
My favorite part is “ some of whom are certainly contenders for future Supreme Court seats.”
The administration & senate do deserve a round of applause. While I certainly have an issue with some of the nominees, this administration is still the best at nominating a diverse, progressive pool of judges I’ve ever seen.
I want to see some movement on the five circuit court vacancies with no nominee. I’m particularly concerned blue slips are de facto back for circuit court seats. The number of red state seats without a nominee is concerning. I know Biden still feels optimistic Republicans will work in good faith. I’m not so sure but I hope he ends up being right or Durbin rethinks blue slips.
LikeLike
I share the same concerns. I know they really want the Indians and Kansas district vacancies filled so those will be fascinating in particular.
Really no excuse for the 1st, 3rd, and 4th circuit vacancies not to be solidly liberal and under 50. But we will see…
LikeLike
We may have nominees soon for WNC.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/150-years-white-male-trial-100000994.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for posting the article. I said Dena King was most likely going to be one of the picks a while back. But some great names in the article I hadn’t heard of before. It’s sad to read “ the three names submitted by Democrats last year are no longer under consideration.”
LikeLike
Thanks for posting!
LikeLike
I don’t know if Budd will agree to King. I think we might have a situation like we have in Mississippi. Hopefully, he will allow it to go through.
LikeLike
As much as I hate blue slips, with Judge David Keesler being a white male Democrat that is 60, he’s a good compromise candidate. If the second pick is a Democrat who is of color & younger, that’s a good deal. Even if it’s Dena King or another prosecutor like her I would take that for North Carolina.
Any deal without an actual Republican is good for a red state.
LikeLike
Sounds like a great deal if Budd, Tillis, and the WH can agree on that pair.
LikeLike
This is a long read, but I thought I’d share. This seems so quaint now. If 2012 Durbin could see the future, he wouldn’t be complaining about Republican obstruction of judicial nominees back then.
From Senate journal, March 12, 2012:
Mr. REID:
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 408, 441, 461, 462, 463, 464, 497, 509, 510, 528, 568, 569, 570, 571, 610, 612, and 613.
The PRESIDING OFFICER:
Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will state the nominations.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Gina Marie Groh, of West Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia.
David Nuffer, of Utah, to be United States District Judge for the District of Utah.
Michael Walter Fitzgerald, of California, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of California.
Ronnie Abrams, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York.
Rudolph Contreras, of Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the District of Columbia.
Miranda Du, of Nevada, to be United States District Judge for the District of Nevada.
Susie Morgan, of Louisiana, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Gregg Jeffrey Costa, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas.
David Campos Guaderrama, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Texas.
Brian C. Wimes, of Missouri, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri.
Kristine Gerhard Baker, of Arkansas, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
John Z. Lee, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois.
George Levi Russell, III, of Maryland, to be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland.
John J. Tharp, Jr., of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois.
Jeffrey J. Helmick, of Ohio, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio.
Mary Geiger Lewis, of South Carolina, to be United States District Judge for the District of South Carolina.
Timothy S. Hillman, of Massachusetts, to be United States District Judge for the District of Massachusetts.
Mr. REID:
Mr. President, I have cloture motions relative to each of these district court nominees at the desk, and I ask unanimous consent that it be in order for them to be filed now.
The PRESIDING OFFICER:
Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
…
Mr. DURBIN:
Madam President, I rise to speak about the issue of judicial nominations. Our Nation faces a serious problem: 1 out of every 10 Federal judgeships is vacant. Yet we continue to see—unfortunately and sadly—unprecedented obstruction from the other side of the aisle when it comes to these nominations. Right now on the Executive Calendar of the Senate there are 22 judicial nominations pending. Twelve of these 22 were successfully voted out of the Judiciary Committee last year, 2 of them as far back as October, and 17 of the nominees currently on the calendar were voted out with strong bipartisan support. Additionally, 13 of the 22 nominees who are being held have the approval of the Republican Senator from the State where the nomination has been made. Despite the fact these nominations are not controversial, that they passed by a bipartisan vote in the Judiciary Committee and out of the committee, they still languish on the calendar because of Republican objections. I know people get tired and say: I wish you all weren’t so partisan around here. Well, I hate to give a speech where most will say that is just a partisan speech, but we are talking about nominees who have bipartisan support, with a strong vote coming out of committee being held on the calendar. Despite the fact they are noncontroversial, there have been objections to up-and-down votes. All we ask for is to just give them a vote. It is not right. Unfortunately, it is a new development in the Senate. It used to be when a noncontroversial district or circuit court nominee was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with bipartisan support, that nominee would literally be approved on the Senate floor usually by voice vote within a matter of days. Even when there were battles over the controversial Supreme Court or appellate court nominees, the Senate never obstructed a noncontroversial nominee at the same time, especially at the district court level. When President Obama took office, Senate Republicans adopted a new and disturbing strategy. They began refusing to give their consent to schedule votes on almost all judicial nominees. You say to yourself: Well, what is their strategy? It is very apparent. They are praying, of course, that a Republican will be elected President and they can fill the vacancies. They want them to continue to have empty seats on our judicial courts for the remainder of this year until the election. President Obama’s nominees have been subjected to an unprecedented level of obstruction by the Republicans, more than any other President has received. Listen to this: President Obama’s district court nominees have waited an average of 93 days on the Senate Executive Calendar between a committee vote and a floor vote. How about George W. Bush? How long did his nominees sit on the calendar before Democrats would let them have a vote?
Only 24 days. So 93 days under the Republicans, 24 days under the Democrats. President Obama’s confirmed circuit court nominees have been forced to wait an average of 136 days for a floor vote. President Bush’s circuit court nominees waited an average of 29 days. So 136 days, way over 4 months for the Obama nominees, and less than 1 month for the Bush nominees. Overall, at this point in their terms, President Obama had 131 nominees confirmed at the Federal, circuit, and district court level compared to 172 for President Bush and 183 for President Clinton. It is so obvious the Republicans are stopping worthy bipartisan nominees for strictly political reasons. Current judicial vacancies at this point in President Obama’s term are 83, nearly double the 46 vacancies of President Bush’s term. I know my Republican colleagues sometimes argue that President Obama is too slow to make nominations, but that argument doesn’t explain what happens after the nominations have been made, cleared investigations, cleared the committee, and reached the Senate calendar. Right now there are 39 judicial nominees pending either before the Judiciary Committee or on the floor of the Senate. Promptly confirming these numbers would bring President Obama’s confirmation numbers close to President Bush’s. But still the obstruction continues. Some might argue that blocking judicial nominees is just another one of those silly partisan games in Washington. But, unfortunately, this obstruction has real impact across America. There are 35 judicial vacancies that have been designated judicial emergencies by the nonpartisan Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. That means the Federal courts are so flooded with heavy workloads that the failure to fill the vacancies makes it even worse. It means justice will be delayed. And when justice is delayed, many times it is denied. When court systems suffer from lack of judges on the bench, the administration of justice suffers at every level, criminal and civil. All Americans rely on the Federal courts to protect their constitutional rights, keep dangerous criminals off the streets, and resolve their disputes. When judgeships are vacant and judges remain overburdened, the American people may be denied their day in court. Right now, the Northern District of Illinois—that would be Chicago, northern Illinois—is one of the districts where a judicial emergency has been declared. The chief judge of the district, Judge Jim Holderman, an appointee under a Republican President, recently sent a letter to me and my colleague Senator KIRK urging the Senate to move quickly on two nominees sitting on the calendar—John Lee, my nominee approved by Senator KIRK, and Jay Tharp, Senator KIRK’s nominee approved by me. A bipartisan judicial selection committee chose these nominees, and both of us signed off on them. Isn’t that what America wants, that we work together? So why are they sitting on a calendar? There is an emergency in the Northern District, the judge has asked for help, we have agreed on a bipartisan basis how to fill the vacancies, yet they languish on the calendar.
I wanted to take this opportunity to briefly talk about these nominees caught up in this backlog on the Senate floor. Both of them are extraordinarily well-gifted and talented. John Lee is currently a partner in a major law firm in Chicago, where he practices complex commercial litigation. He is the son of a coal miner and a nurse. He immigrated to this country from Korea at a young age. From humble beginnings, he went on to college and law school at Harvard. He then worked as a trial attorney in the Justice Department, and he had a great record in community service in Chicago. When he is confirmed, he will be the first Korean-American article III judge ever to serve in my State. Jay Tharp, Senator KIRK’s nominee, of whom I approve, is a partner in another major law firm in Chicago, where he leads their securities litigation practice. He is a former captain in the Marine Corps with a distinguished military career. He attended Duke University and Northwestern Law School and clerked for a Federal judge on the Seventh Circuit. For 6 years he was an assistant U.S. attorney, a prosecutor, and he has received numerous recognitions for his work in private practice. As part of our bipartisan selection process, Senator KIRK has chosen Jay Tharp and I have chosen Mr. LEE. We have done this in the most cooperative way possible. I think it is time for the Senate to move ahead with the floor votes on these two nominees and all of the nominees. If a Senator has an objection to one of these nominees, let’s call it for a vote. They can vote no. And if they don’t get a majority vote, they won’t be approved. That is the way this Chamber is supposed to work. Good, decent Americans such as John Lee and Jay Tharp shouldn’t have to put their lives on hold when they have volunteered to be nominees to the Federal court. In most instances, those who step up and ask for this opportunity of public service are actually taking a cut in pay from what they could be paid in private practice. They are willing to make a sacrifice. Their families are willing to make it. But now we leave them in this limbo. They are caught in this political limbo created by the Republicans in an effort to stack up judges like cordwood on the calendar in the hopes that come November, they will get a Republican President who will fill these vacancies with true believers. That isn’t fair. It doesn’t reflect the reality when President Obama was elected to serve and to fill these vacancies in a meaningful way. The process is bipartisan. Certainly, the Senate’s consideration of nominees should be bipartisan as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We need 2012 Durbin to talk to 2023 Durbin. The GW Bush judicial wait times for a vote compared to Obama was stark. 24 days compared to 93 days for district court nominees & 136 days compared to 29 days for circuit court nominees was insane.
LikeLike
Stark indeed.
But what about considering nearly 20 judicial nominations en bloc? That was only 11 years ago, but it may as well be 112 years for how old gone those days are.
LikeLike
When I say or agree to something, I always do so putting myself in the worst case scenario. So in this case, would I want that if we had a Republican president & senate majority. Probably not worth the reward unlike my opinion on blue slips.
I think Klobachar’s proposal is spot on. The senate should be able to consider 20 nominees st once with the exception of SCOTUS, circuit court & district court judges as well as cabinet secretaries & perhaps a small number of other high profile nominees. The military absolutely should be able to have 20 considered at once along with US Attorneys, US Marshall’s, positions like secretary of baking cookies & other positions that aren’t lifetime & that few people care about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Harry Reid’s 2012 cloture filings relied on the lack of objection from a GOP senator. In 2012, there were far fewer right wing extremists in the Senate than there are in 2023.
LikeLike
No surprise at all, but we have a nominations hearing scheduled for Wednesday, July 12.
My biggest question is will Mathew Maddox be joining Philip Hadji and the two Louisiana nominees?
LikeLike
If not, I’m afraid Mathew Maddox will be the next Jabari Wamble. No way he would miss 3 straight hearings without something wrong.
LikeLike
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/9th-circuit-conservatives-blast-homelessness-ruling-say-issue-is-paralyzing-us-west/ar-AA1dvPX6https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/9th-circuit-conservatives-blast-homelessness-ruling-say-issue-is-paralyzing-us-west/ar-AA1dvPX6
There’s infighting at the 9th Circuit.
LikeLike
Every Republican appointee (even M. Smith & Miller) voted to rehear this case. M. Smith, a moderate, feels very strongly that the majority decision was wrong. Miller, who rarely votes to grant rehearings, voted to rehear this case. On the other end, there are several moderate Democratic appointees (including Gould, who also feels strongly that the majority decision was correct) who all voted not to rehear this case.
LikeLike
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/9th-circuit-conservatives-blast-homelessness-ruling-say-issue-is-paralyzing-us-west/ar-AA1dvPX6
LikeLike
de Alba should be along before the Summer recess to help as well. I’m still hoping for another 1 or 2 judges leaving the bench from the 9th before the elections next year. It’s one of the bright spots when it comes to Biden quickly nominating progressive judges so I truly hope he gets to match Trump’s 10 judges with 2 more vacancies before the end of next year.
LikeLike
There is a vacancy in Wyoming on the District Court. My eye is on Magistrate Judge Stephanie Hambrick.
LikeLike
And one of the other two active judges is an 84-year-old Reagan appointee. So there’s a decent chance if Biden wins re-election, he will name 2 of the 3 judges.
LikeLike
I’m very curious. What reasons do we have to be so optimistic that these deep red state district court vacancies are going to get filled by Biden?
Are we assuming that most of these hard right-wing senators are afraid to have vacancies on their home state courts?
Or that they care much about having judicial emergencies declared in their states?
Or that they won’t just hold on to those vacancies like CA, MA, NJ, and to some extent NY did during the Trump years?
I, for one, admittedly the resident pessimist, don’t see these senators rushing to work with Biden to fill these vacancies, or fill them with anyone quarter-decent. If these are to be filled, expect more Chad Merediths than Stephen Lochers.
For example, in my opinion, there’s no way Daines will allow Biden to name Dana Christensen’s replacement if Christensen takes senior status. Unless it’s a Chad Meredith nominee.
Some Dems held, Republicans can, too.
LikeLike
Gavi, in most of the red states Mitch and others have been discussing, you are absolutely right.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Professional Diversity by Senator
I think this is an interesting article about senators and their diversity in picking judicial candidates.
https://ballsandstrikes.org/professional-diversity-by-senator/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, I saw this.
I love Booker’s rating. So well-deserved and embarrassing, especially since he’s a loudmouth progressive, on SJC, and is apparently worse than Menendez. Think about that last part.
LikeLike
Sad. I am disappointed with my home state senators Cardin and Van Hollen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I mean, Menendez did recommend Castner, so that makes sense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I meant to also add that this is the diversity that matters. A black prosecutor/corporate attorney will largely judge differently than a white Innocence Project/ACLU attorney. I can’t fathom why some don’t understand this basic point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree here completely.
LikeLike
OK, assuming @Harsh doesn’t block this post, it’s time for another (completely speculative) guessing game.
Who thinks that Kenly Kato will be confirmed next week? (Yes, I’m well aware that only the WA-W nominees have had cloture petitions filed so far. That’s why it’s a guess). Let’s stipulate that all 51 Democrats are in next week.
This would take care of the oldest vacancy in the Federal system, one of 7 remaining vacancies from the Trump presidency. Only 4 of them have nominees, although WI-E and FL-S may be announced soon and Cartwright’s confirmation early next week will take one of the 2020 vacancies off the list.
Second question–if not Kato, who else do we think will be confirmed next week other than Cartwright and Evanson?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ rayspace
My guess is after the 2 Washington state nominees are confirmed, we will get some combination of Kato, Bloomekatz or unfortunately Ramirez lined up.
@ derickjohnson
Some embarrassing ratings. Many of the worst offenders have pending vacancies with no nominees yet so hopefully they are shamed into making good picks like governor Hochul was.
@Gavi
Yup, I agree on I would rather s White make ACLU lawyer than a Black prosecutor in most cases. I say most cases because I think we need to focus on diversity too but since this president has exceeded in that area, it’s not a big deal when he picks a liberal White male at this point.
LikeLike
Hmm. The blog is glitchy today for me. I cannot see the names of commenters. I only see a number. For example, I don’t see Dequan’s name (but I know it’s him because I know his writing style haha). Instead, I see “posted 10 mins ago by [185].”
You folks are naming others in your replies, so does that mean this is only affecting me?
LikeLike
I can see all names @Gavi (This is Dequan). Perhaps log out & back in again?
And as for your other post, I most definitely agree with you. I think Montana, Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee & Alabama all are likely to not have nominees before the election if there’s no MAGA Republican part of the deal. That’s one of my main reasons for ditching blue slips or at the very least amending them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just logged out, logged back in, went in to the reader, and that solved the issue (which I had as well).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Probably the Illinois and maybe Massachusetts. Hopefully he will get DDC as well.
LikeLike
My hope is that Bloomekatz is the next nominee lined up for a vote once the Washington duo is confirmed. Appellate nominees should receive priority and ideally Ramirez and de Alba will be confirmed prior to the August recess as well.
LikeLike
Thanks! The fix worked!
Also, I remember when some thought that Ramirez would be voted out of committee and voice voted on the floor the same day hahaha.
I agree with Joe that COA nominees should absolutely get priority on the floor, even if their consideration take a lot more time and even if district court nominees have been waiting longer. Can you imagine a SCOTUS nominee waiting in the wings until the previously nominated COA and district court nominees get their vote first?
LikeLike
@Gavi
I wish Schumer would take my advice for the circuit court confirmations. A cloture motion should be sent on Tuesday, cloture vote on Thursday & confirmation vote the following Monday. Do that every week until all circuit court nominees have been confirmed. Both Thursday & Monday are short days for the senate anyway. Do the circuit court cloture vote on Thursday after a confirmation vote pending from Wednesday night. Tuesday & Wednesdays which are the only full days can be used for everything else.
LikeLike
I don’t think he’s likely to do that because he wouldn’t want to attendance issues throwing sand in the gears. Notwithstanding, I would volunteer to work on his staff for free to manage or give advice on the executive calendar.
LikeLike
And I would carry you to the meetings if you ran out of gas… Haaaaaa
It bothers me so much that these guys work 3 days a week (At most), have no months without at least one week off yet still have attendance issues… Uuuggghhh
Well he can keep my advice but just have a cloture vote on Secretary of Baking Cookies or some other meaningless position & have both set up for the following Monday. And if there’s attendance issues just have the one non controversial vote.
LikeLike
Agree Gavi. Plus, you never know when a member could get ill or otherwise miss time. Best to get them out of the way as soon as it is reasonably possible to have full attendance.
LikeLike
Has anyone noticed that 5 Wikipedia articles for nominees are now in red?
LikeLike
Yes, I wrote last week here that two idiots are using Wikipedia loopholes to try & get all pages pulled down for nominees until they are confirmed. I included the link tit eh deletion discussion to try & get as many people here as possible to vote to keep them but I didn’t see anybody vote so they pages are taken down now. There will be more to come sadly.
LikeLike
Yep. Wikipedia being wikipedia.
LikeLike
There’s two assholes in particular that are Hell bent on deleting all pages for non confirmed judges. They even are trying to delete the pages of Deepak Gupta & Rochelle Garza but I think most people are voting to keep those
LikeLike
Do you think we will see another opening on the 4th Circuit?
Tomorrow marks the end of Fourth Circuit Chief Judge Roger Gregory’s term, a few days short of his 70th birthday. He’ll be succeeded by Judge Albert Diaz of North Carolina. If you can read into such things, he is currently hiring only 3 clerks for next term on OSCAR but…
LikeLike
With the ages & number of Democrat appointees eligible to retire on the 4th, I can definitely see another one or two vacancies before the end of next year. It would be nice if they expedited their announcement if so because as we see in Maryland, even blue states can take over a year to fill circuit court vacancies.
LikeLike
I can see Roger Gregory of Virginia and James Wynn of Maryland taking Senior Status soon. Wynn may be waiting for the current vacancy to be filled before announcing.
Harvie Wilkinson and Paul Niemeyer are likely planning on staying for life.
LikeLike
I do hope we get several more openings on the fourth circuit. It may take a second Biden term though.
LikeLike
Future vacancy announced for Western district of Virginia. Michael Urbanski, next July. Hopefully plenty of time for Biden, Warner and Kaine to finally get the first person of color appointed to this district. A do-over after whatever stopped that one potential nominee last year; there’s surely other good choices to recommend.
LikeLike
There was a woman’s league that wrote a statement about Juval Scott saying her temperament wasn’t good to be a federal judge. That sunk her chances & led to us getting a 62 year old White man who wasn’t progressive. I’m assuming there will be pressure to get a person of color onto the court man or woman. Since the district itself isn’t very diverse I would look for a person of color without a heavy progressive background. It may be somebody from the US attorneys office or a law firm from the area.
LikeLike
You will likely get your wish with this WHC, and there is bound to be some pressure from some legal groups (although I’m skeptical regarding how much influence they are perceived to have by some here) but that would still be a missed opportunity to get someone from a diverse legal background. I’d rather see someone from the federal public defenders office, no matter what racial background, but with this WHC that is likely wishful thinking and the nominee will still be better than a FedSoc hack.
Before Dequan replies with his ad nauseam argument, “But Democrats will lose votes if they don’t nominate someone of color!”, what polling or other metric shows that an even small amount of voters outside of this blog know or care what the race or sex is for district court judges?
LikeLike
@Frank
You probably missed my reply to @Gavi a couple days ago. I absolutely believe diversity is important, even at the extent of a more progressive nominee to a certain extent. But I also wrote I think the president can do both, particularly in blue states & when he can’t, it won’t affect him as much since he has already broken numerous diversity records in just 2 & a half years.
So in the case of this vacancy, I would gladly take a White male in his 30’s or 40’s with a progressive background over a person of color who isn’t progressive. I would not be saying that had we have not gotten a LGBT Black man in his 30’s, a Black woman & Elizabeth Haynes who is progressive already for other seats in the state. Had all of the Virginia seats gone to White men then yes, I most definitely think this seat should have gone to a person of color.
You ask what leads me to believe not adding diversity will hurt the president electoral? Have you not been watching? President Biden has exceeded all previous presidents in diversity & guess what… He is STILL being criticized. What do you think the criticism would have been had he put a White man on the SCOTUS instead of KBJ? How about 37 White men for the circuit courts instead of what we have?
There’s no way anybody can reasonably look at what this president has done diversity wise for the courts yet still be getting criticized & think he could be doing even less & not get criticized more. But I do think we have reached the point now where choosing the more progressive nominee is better even if it comes at a cost of diversity.
LikeLike
@Dequan
“I absolutely believe diversity is important, even at the extent of a more progressive nominee to a certain extent.”
This amazes me.
But first, let me make sure that I understand what you mean. Are you saying that in certain situations you’d take identity politics over judicial philosophy? IE, if it’s one OR the other, you’d be willing to sacrifice getting a progressive judge so you can get a black judge instead?
LikeLike
@Gavi
I would only want a less progressive person of color over a more progressive White male if it will hurt the end game of what I want. I want a Democrat president to be in office if there is a SCOTUS vacancy & to nominate federal judges & a Democrat majority in the senate to confirm them.
So in the example I gave you a few weeks ago (Yes I know it was an extreme example but that was intentional), if you offered me a deal for 37 straight White male circuit court judges that are as progressive as Dale Ho or take the 37 we got, I would choose the 37 we got. That’s because Biden nominating 37 straight White male Dale Ho’s would lose him votes. There simply would be an outrage & backlash that would lose him votes & I want him to be able to name 37 more, which he can’t if we have a Republican president elected next year.
But to piggyback on what I wrote you the other day I don’t think we are at that point now. With his record breaking two years of adding diversity to the judiciary, if you offered me a deal for 5 White male Dale Ho’s for the existing circuit court seats without a nominee or 5 nominees of color like Childs, Pan & Ramirez, I would take the 5 straight White males. That’s because I don’t think it would hurt Biden electorally with his record over the past two years.
For me it’s all about the long game.
LikeLike
I see. Since I view race-based politics as a zero-sum game (ie, an identity-diverse nominee doesn’t account for any OTHER types of identities, for example, do you see yourself in any of Trump’s identity-diverse COA appointments?) I think no amount of racial diversity will satisfy every group. The country is just so diverse. As you have said above, Biden ranks #1 in appointing diverse judges but still faces criticisms.
Obviously no modern day president is going to appoint only white judges. But we could have a president that only or mostly appoint progressive/conservative ones. So that’s where my focus is.
LikeLike
@Gavi
Trump had 54 circuit court judges & not one of them was Black. A few Hispanics & I can think of Bustamany as the only LGBT but not much diversity. And yea I agree no president, even Trump would only appoint White men but just using an extreme example to show you why I am no where near as hard line as you are when it comes to not considering race… Lol
Also agree with the Kansas situation. Ideally a good WHC would send three names to the senators & if they agree to one fine, if not then tell them to take a hike. Especially when there is only one district court vacancy in the state. But as I have said I don’t think we will see anymore circuit court nominations without both blue slips turned in the rest of Biden’s first term so that’s out the window now.
LikeLike
And Rao and Ho and Thapar, or his Jewish and women judges, just off the top of my head. But you are making my point about the zero-sumness of identity politics. You don’t see yourself represented in any of Trump’s diverse COA pics. Now times that by everyone who’s from a group not yet selected by one president or another.
LikeLike
Well you are countering my extreme example with another extreme. Ramirez, Childs & Pan are the three worst circuit court nominees I’ve seen from Biden out of the 37. Yet I would take all three of them over all 54 of Trump’s.
So I’m assuming they are the floor. But yes if you want to take your example to the extreme then of course I would agree with you. I would rather 37 straight White male Dale Ho’s over a handful of Biden James Ho’s but that’s because I think he would still suffer electorally if he nominated a handful of James Ho’s. So mine as well get all Dale Ho’s if he’s gonna lose votes in both scenarios. He ain’t losing no votes by nominating Ramirez, Childs & Pan… Lol
LikeLike
People have speculated on the Kansas vacancies. It was assumed that the Senators were blocking the nominations of Jabari Wamble, but it turned out to not be their doing. They say negotiations are ongoing.
I expect that the Senators are willing to make concessions on the District Court vacancy in exchange for a compromise nominee for the Circuit vacancy.
LikeLike
A topic that’s so thoroughly discussed here. I don’t know if there’s anything new to add.
LikeLike
Have you seen Schumer’s latest Dear Colleague letter on the upcoming work period?
He’s used words like this before that didn’t turn into action so don’t read this as a binding contract (remember his statements before the 2022 adjournment about getting the 100th confirmation done?). But it’s very good to see judicial confirmation taking up so much real estate in the letter.
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/schumer-dear-colleague-on-upcoming-work-period
He’s also talked about the ethics scandal as if he intends to make any movement on that issue.
LikeLike
@Gavi
Can we forward the last page of Schumer’s letter to this White Houe Counsel’s office? It’s nice the senate will confirm nominees, but we are getting to the point where we’re running low on nominees for them to confirm… Lol
LikeLike
I think there will be another package of nominees coming later this month. I also expect it’ll be a small package.
LikeLike
Ha. It shouldn’t be Dear Colleague. It should be Dear White House Counsel.
If we get another batch it’s shaping up to be only 2, if the trend holds.
LikeLike
Well we always have the “couple” of nominees Cornyn & Cruz are “in the process” of recommending. You know, couple out of the EIGHT vacancies in Texas. Thank God for the 59-year-old centrist for the 5th… Lol
Hopefully the next package will be Claire Connors for one of the two Hawaii vacancies, Nicholas Gowen or Karen Shelley for NDIL & hopefully at least one of the California nominees for one of the three vacancies. And it’s definitely past time for the 4th vacancy to be filled so I hope that’s in the next package too. The remaining Connecticut & Michigan vacancies are possible too.
LikeLike
@Dequan
I expect that Nicholas Gowen will be nominated soon. He does more to promote diversity, but is also more confirmable than Karen Shelley.
LikeLike
Yea I agree Nicholas Gowen is more likely going to be the nominee. Karen Shelley started working in the governor’s office last year but her police accountability work from her past is probably enough to scare this White House Counsel’s office away.
LikeLike
Why are people saying the WHC is making decisions on who is nominated?
LikeLike
Look who’s back posting again! I thought you went away for good.
Have you come back to enlighten us about the selecting process that doesn’t include the WHC office?
We know that judicial selection is shared across the DOJ, WHC, and the judicial nominations teams in the CoS’s office.
LikeLike
It may include him but that doesn’t make him the person who makes the decision.
I heard you missed me I am back!
LikeLike
Yes, definitely hope to see another batch this month. We need a nominees for the 4th (and other appellate vacancies)!
LikeLike
FYI, for vote counting purposes this week, six Senators are in Lithuania today for the NATO summit. Three GOP, three Dem, including Durbin. Numbers are balanced at least. Couldn’t tell from the story I read when they’ll be returning.
Looking forward to getting back to confirmations though this week.
LikeLike
More wikipedia pages for judicial nominees seem to have been deleted recently. What is with that website?
LikeLike
@Frank
I sent out an explanation about a week & a half ago here trying to get people to write in & vote to keep the pages before they were taken down. There are a couple of users (I have more colorful language then that but I’ll be nice & call them users here) that are Hell bent on getting virtually all pages for any nominees that haven’t been confirmed pulled down.
They are using a Wikipedia loophole to say people aren’t notable until they have actually been confirmed to be federal judges. It only happened once before with Tiffany Cartwright. He page was actually reinstated a couple weeks ago. The user (I think his name is Let’s Run) tried to use her page being pulled down as a precedent to pull most other nominees pages down. When I explained her page is already back up & she hasn’t been confirmed yet he flipped & for her page pulled back down.
I put in a proposal to Wikipedia (Link below) to establish all nominees to automatically be considered notable. I would advise all of you to comment you support the idea. So far the idiots that got the page pulled down have out voted the proposal to oppose it but there is still time if enough of you write in before the voting closes.
(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)?markasread=285622415&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-Let’srun-20230709151800-BD2412-20230708232300)
LikeLike
Didn’t you mention at one point that Jorge Alberto Rodriguez had his article taken down by the same clown? That would technically make it 2 (but out of hundreds of nominees). Will look to make a wikipediaish argument in support of that proposal later.
LikeLike
Yes but his rationale for Jorge Rodriguez was different, albeit still bs in my opinion. He said since he wasn’t notable before the nomination & the nomination was withdrawn, then he shouldn’t have a page. My opinion was not being confirmed in itself is notable. But not enough oriole voted in support of keeping the page so it was deleted. So yes, please reply on my proposal to support & get as many other Wikipedia users to do the same so maybe we can stop this asshole once & for all.
LikeLike
Honestly, if any failed Biden judicial nominee should have an article, it should be him.
LikeLike
Totally. This only started with Biden nominees. That’s why I made the props to try & stop this from happening in the future but the Let’s Run idiot & his buddies are all ganging up to vote no.
LikeLike
Just supported the proposal now.
LikeLike
@Frank
Awesome, thanks
LikeLike
Looks like “Let’srun” isn’t awake yet, but one of his cronies is.
LikeLike
I saw that. If they would spend half as much energy to improve pages as they do deleting them, Wikipedia would be a better place. I wish Ballotpedia was better. I wouldn’t even use Wikipedia if they were a viable alternative.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just commented Dequan. Not sure if I used the right language or if it’ll make a difference, but worth a shot. To me it seems insane that if someone takes the time to make a page for someone that the President has nominated that they would get taken down. To me this is like if someone took down the page for a movie in production or a book that is being written.
But I guess some people have too much time on their hands.
LikeLike
Thanks @Joe.
An yup, insane to me too. I think it’s a combination of what you said, some people have too much time on their hands combined with political motives (Not one Trump page was requested to be deleted) & some people are simply miserable & the only thing that makes them happy is to make happy people miserable.
I hope others on this blog comment in support of the proposal as well.
LikeLike
@Joe
The idiot user Let’s Run just replied to your comment to support the proposal. He is Hell bent out on making sure it doesn’t pass. At this point I think he has dedicated his life to making sure Wikipedia doesn’t have pages on judicial nominees. He has out right been obsessed the past week & a half. He must lead a sad life
LikeLike