Judge Ramona Manglona – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands

The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (“CNMI”), an unincorporated territory of the United States, is served by one federal Article IV court, which means that the judges who serve on the court don’t have lifetime tenure but are instead appointed for ten year terms. As such, the court is currently serving without a senate confirmed judge since Chief Judge Ramona Villagomez Manglona’s term expired on July 28, 2021. Two years later, President Biden has renominated Manglona to serve an additional ten year term.

Background

A native of the Mariana Islands, Manglona was born in Saipan on February 26, 1967. She subsequently attended the University of California at Berkeley, graduating with a B.A. in 1990 and then worked in her family’s real estate business before receiving a J.D. in 1996 from the University of New Mexico School of Law.

After graduation, Manglona clerked for the Superior Court for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands before joining the CNMI Attorney General’s Office in the criminal division. In 2001, Manglona shifted to the Civil Division and in 2002 was named Deputy Attorney General and later that same year became Attorney General (the first female attorney general in CNMI history).

In 2003, Manglona was named to the Northern Mariana Islands Superior Court. She held that position until 2011 when President Obama named her to succeed Judge Alex Munson on the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands. While Manglona’s term expired in 2021, she still serves on the court pursuant to a law permitting her to hold the post until a successor is confirmed.

History of the Seat

Manglona has been reappointed to replace herself on the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands. If confirmed, Manglona would serve an additional ten year term on the bench.

Legal Experience

Manglona has spent her entire career prior to taking the bench at the CNMI Attorney General’s Office. She has held a variety of positions with the office: the Criminal Division; the Civil Division; Deputy Attorney General; and as Attorney General. During this time, Manglona tried seven jury trials: five criminal; and two civil.

Manglona’s most notable criminal case involved the first prosecution for “shaken baby syndrome” in the Commonwealth. See Commonwealth v. Manila, Crim. No. 00-0509 (N.M.I. Super. Ct. Oct. 21, 2001). Manglona led the prosecution of the defendant who was convicted after a jury trial and sentenced to sixty years in jail. Her most notable civil jury trial was in a Section 1983 lawsuit brought against three police officers on charges of police brutality, which ended in a jury verdict for the defendants on the pending counts. See Cabrera, et al. v. CNMI Dep’t of Public Safety, et al., Civ. No. 00-0022 (D.N.M.I. Dec. 18, 2001) (Hon. Alex R. Munson).

Jurisprudence

From 2003 to 2011, Manglona served on the Northern Mariana Islands Superior Court, a court of general jurisdiction that hears both civil and criminal cases. Manglona was also retained in a 2007 election to a full six year term. Through her tenure, Manglona presided over approximately 150 cases. Among her notable cases, Manglona presided over a request by Kazuyoshi Miura (a business whose case was dubbed the “O.J. Simpson case of Japan”) who was challenging an arrest warrant and extradition order to California for trial for the murder of his wife in Los Angeles. See In re Extradition Matter of Kazuyoshi Miura, Crim. No. 08-0030C (N.M.I. Super. Ct. Sept. 15 2008). Manglona denied Miura’s motion for a writ of habeas corpus and authorized his extradition to California.

As part of her role, Manglona also sat as Justice Pro Tem on the Guam Supreme Court and as a Judge Pro Tem on the Guam Superior Court.

Since 2011, Manglona has served as the Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands. Of her notable decisions in that court, Manglona held that a limitation issued by the Commonwealth limiting voting in certain elections to individuals of “Northern Marianas descent” constituted a race-based restriction in violation of the Fifteenth Amendment. See Davis v. Commonwealth Election Comm’n, 844 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2016). This decision was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. See id. In another notable decision, Manglona held that a challenge by environmental groups to the relocation of training ranges onto Guam was barred by the “political question” doctrine. See Tinian Women Ass’n v. United States Dep’t of Navy, 976 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2020). The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal, but held that it should be for lack of standing, finding that the relocation was based on a treaty with Japan, which rendered the claims non-redressable. See id. at 834.

Overall Assessment

In 2011, Manglona was unanimously confirmed by the Senate to serve on the federal bench on the Northern Mariana Islands. Her record reflects little that should change that assessment. While judicial confirmation is significantly more partisan today than it was even a decade ago, a failure to confirm Manglona would not keep her off the bench as she could continue to serve until a successor was confirmed. As such, it is likely that, while Manglona will likely attract more opposition today than she did in 2011, she will likely be confirmed in due course.

196 Comments

  1. Yaaaaaaa… I’m more excited to see a new post by Harsh than I am a nominee for a seat with a 10 year term… Lol

    This is probably the most qualified person for this vacancy. She should be confirmed with little opposition if not voice vote.

    Like

  3. Not sure why judges are in Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands have to be reappointed.

    But that being said, lifetime appointments should go the way of the dinosaur on all federal courts. The only state Supreme Court that still has lifetime appointments is Rhode Island.

    Like

      • On another note, I heavily disagree with your take on lifetime appointments (although maybe I could see the perks with mandatory senior status at 90, even then I am skeptical that makes the courts better). If someone is experienced and is still able to do the job at a high level, there’s no reason they should have to leave simply because of how old they are. Ageism is a form of discrimination that should not be as tolerated as it is currently.

        Like

    • I think it would just lead to more unqualified young lawyers/FedSoc hacks being appointed too early since there would actually be a specific limit on the length of time which they could serve. Still nothing would be stopping them from leaving early to allow someone with the same leanings to replace them.

      Like

      • Why wouldn’t they be able to under your proposal? Judgeships need to be filled quickly, especially for many district courts where having more vacancies is not what they need and the ability for trials to be quick and speedy becomes harder when there is more of a revolving door. Unless you are saying judges should be elected, which, if so, is a even worse idea than what I thought you were saying. Lifetime appointments isn’t really as bad as many on the left make it out to be.

        Like

  5. @Frank,

    It would de-politicize the process since judges wouldn’t be allowed to leave the bench based on who is in office. It would also decrease the likelihood of administrations appointing young judges since it wouldn’t be as much about the long game anymore.

    Like

  6. Personally I think it would be better if federal judges had a term. Maybe not age limits, but a 15 or 20 year term seems reasonable. If the WH/Senate wants to reappoint them, just make the senate confirm them again.

    Having 90 year olds on our federal courts that haven’t faced any review or accountability since the Reagan administration seems like a bad system.

    Like

  8. All these proposals that seek to make the judiciary better suffer from the same defect. No amount of changes can account for the lack of statutory ethical requirements. I would, however, support mandatory age limits. I often discard anything Joe says for being too naively hopey, but I totally agree with him that 90-year-olds appointed to the bench long before I was even born shouldn’t still be deciding on the law for me. I could set that mandatory retirement age at 80, at most. But more negotiable between 70 and 75. Sick and tired of old judges determining our future in which they have very little chance of sharing.

    Let’s look at some of the common proposals:

    Term limit:
    Exactly how would this make the judiciary better? If a judge can wreak havoc in 30 years, they can wreak havoc in 15 or 20 years. All this does is increase the pool of how many people can wreak havoc on the courts.
    Ethan, how in the world would this prevent judges from leaving the bench earlier? If a judge is in the 10th year of a 15-year term and a friendly WH and senate have power, can’t that judge simply leave so that the president can nominate someone likeminded?

    Term limit subject to confirmation:
    Admittedly, this would be one of the best systems on *paper* but in practice this would give us Merrick Garland of 2016 on steroid. Think about the 800+ seats on the judiciary coming up for regular renomination? You would have to hope that your side holds both the WH and senate at the same time. Talk about wild swings in the law. This is not a great way to operate the judiciary.
    What if a president decides not to renominate the current holder of seat. How does that improve the judiciary to get a new person starting from scratch, providing that the senate approves?
    If you have a problem with the extreme rulings now, wait until you see how judges would serve when they can throw caution to the wind. Remember, after your 15–20-year term, these judges will need a new job. So those judges can play favorites and rule in favor of future employers.

    Staggered term:
    This has all the same defects as the proposals above. It just opens up the pool to even more people to misbehave.

    What others am I missing?

    The simple solution is to pass strong judicial ethic rules and follow up with violation with swift impeachment and removal.

    Like

      • I just saw this and feel like I should correct it. This isn’t accurate, Ryan.
        We’ve discussed many times on here how the senate can technically confirm anyone to any position many years in advance. The only issue is, that confirmed nominee cannot take office until it’s actually vacant.
        A seat does not have to be vacant before the senate may vote on a nominee put forward to fill it, let alone, before a president makes that nomination.
        Just remember last year. KBJ was nominated and confirmed months before Breyer’s final departure date was even set.
        For another example closer to this vacancy right off the top of my head, Scalia was nominated to SCOTUS 4 days after Rehnquist was nominated for CJ. We have many examples of this.

        Whatever the hold up with the Sherriff nomination, it isn’t because of de Alba not being confirmed yet.

        Like

      • The problem isn’t a White House can’t send nominations to the senate before the vacancy occurs. The problem is this White House doesn’t seem to be doing it in all cases. The KBJ example was a high profile seat & they seemed capable of doing it then. However we have other examples of them not doing it.

        If you go back to the very first batch, Biden nominated 11. He sent 10 to the senate fairly quickly. But he waited to send Florence Pan’s name to the senate until KBJ was confirmed to the DC circuit. I’m not sure what the rhyme or reason is behind sending some names to the senate while not sending others. Even in the case of Park, who cares the seat doesn’t open up until August 2024, just send her name now, confirm her by early next year & let her stay on the lower Hawaii state court until the seat becomes vacant in August.

        We’re gonna either miss another SJC hearing or have a hearing with 3 or possibly 2 judicial nominees. They will probably use seat fillers for the other seats at the table with nominees for Secretary of Baking Cookies or some other meaningless position.

        Honestly there’s no rush anyway. Now that Tuberville has won & the senate are confirming the military promotions one by one, we are gonna see a slow down on judges. Tuberville in his speech yesterday on the senate floor said he would rather spend time confirming the military promotions instead of confirming more of president Biden’s liberal judges like the one they just confirmed a fee hours ago (Rita Lin). He knows Schumer’s threat of working through the weekend is complete & utter bull shit. We just spend yesterday & about to spend today confirming military promotions that are usually done by UA instead of judges. At this point Tuberville looks brilliant. He may never release his hold even if the military reversed the abortion policy. He knows Schumer isn’t gonna hold the senate in session through any weekend. I’m so angry he won. Calling Schumer’s weekend bluff was the easiest call this side of the World Series of Poker.

        Like

      • OK, I was explaining the legality of it and addressing directly what Ryan said affirmatively couldn’t happen. The poor strategy of this WH is a different story.

        “Tuberville in his speech yesterday on the senate floor said he would rather spend time confirming the military promotions instead of confirming more of president Biden’s liberal judges like the one they just confirmed a fee hours ago (Rita Lin).”

        Are you kidding?! He said that?! Wow! Not only did he win, he’s rubbing Schumer’s and Biden’s faces in it. My word.

        Like

      • Oh yea, I knew the WH can send the names anytime. I was strictly commenting on THIS WH strategy which is crap.

        And yup, Tuberville sure did say that. I didn’t see it yesterday but I was watching MSNBC this morning & they played the clip on Morning Joe. I’m legit angry. Tuberville literally is saying out loud what I’ve been screaming for months here on the blog. I better not ever hear the word “weekend” come out of Schumer’s mouth again. It’s complete bull shit. We literally just spent a Wednesday & Thursday confirming military personnel that should have been done in batch. There’s no senate working tonight past 5pm. There’s no senate working tomorrow. There’s no senate working Saturday. It’s a bluff & a bad one at that.

        Oh & let’s not forget Vance hold on US attorneys now too. That will take up more days of senate floor time to confirm now. Yet all of these guys still have blue slips & we are expecting them to work in good faith on filling judicial vacancies in their state.

        Well let’s look at the good news. At least we can go to the next parade Durbin throws when Republican senators turn in blue slips for nominees that don’t require blue slips… My God it’s tough being a Democrat these days when my side is so outsmarted & outclassed…smh

        Like

      • “My God it’s tough being a Democrat these days when my side is so outsmarted & outclassed”

        Ahh, don’t be so damn negative, Dequan! This is exactly what Frank told us voters want! Don’t you know that for Democrats, it’s a binary choice between being a GOP clone and being outsmarted & outclassed?

        Like

    • I just checked like a half hour ago on that (it wasn’t posted when I checked), was a little concerned since the meeting hadn’t been posted yet (usually they’re done a week out). But yes, the four nominees from the hearing two weeks ago should be held over.

      If I remember, last year, the nominees were typically held over a week after their hearings, feels like this year there’s been a two week lag between the hearings and the holdover. Is it just Republicans sending more post-hearing questions to the nominees? I know last year we were running up against a midterm where control of the Senate was very much in question so maybe the idea was to just get everything out and assume you’re going to lose the Senate?

      Oliver’s cloture vote was 54-40, got the normal trio of Republicans + Tillis (who did vote for him in the SJC as well). Only Democrat absent was Mark Kelly, not that I expect anything else filed this week.

      Like

      • Seems like what has happened recently is that the held over week was canceled, and then they voted on the nominees the next week.. So it’s really the same I guess.

        I just wish we’d get the 1st. 3rd. 4th circuit nominees from the WH, as those seats have been open for a while. Also, I hope the WH fills the 6th circuit vacancy whether or not the Tennessee senators support the nominee or not…

        Like

  15. @shawnee68, I agree that it is a situation of a liberal replacing another liberal, but not all liberal-leaning judges are the same. Like for example, on the 9th Circuit, Judges Fletcher, Berzon, and Paez are to the left ideologically of judges like John Owens or Ronald Gould, despite all the them techically being liberal-leaning.

    Like

    • That’s true, not all liberals are the same. Also I would like to make an argument that I think is common knowledge but seems to sometimes be forgotten on here… unless it’s a clear flip (i.e. Ginsburg to Barrett), we need to wait a few years to understand whether a judge is to the left or right of their predecessor.

      For example, we are speculating that KBJ & de Alba will both be to the left of their predecessors but we could be wrong. Koh, Sanchez, & Holly Thomas are most likely to the right of their predecessors, but we need to wait for more rulings before being sure.

      One more thing that isn’t super obvious: lower court judges might rule more conservatively than the judges the generation before them because the lower courts are bound by Supreme Court precedents, which have rapidly moved to the right. Aside from the occasional Stephen Reinhardt who didn’t care whether he was following Supreme Court precedent, liberal judges tend to adhere to Supreme Court precedent (whether conservatives on the lower courts do is a conversation for another time).

      Like

  16. Come on man, really not gonna file any judicial clotures!? You’ll be done on both judge’s confirmations by 3 pm tomorrow!!! Easily could’ve confirmed 3 judges invoking a cloture vote at 3:30 and going a little late Wednesday.

    Imagine 5(!) judges in 20 hours of senate time.

    Like

      • @Ryan J
        Fetterman never had to change into his suit to vote! He only wore suits for committee meetings, and sometimes went to the floor from there to cast votes.
        Fetterman’s practice is to stay by the door and vote from there, in his sweater and shorts.

        And it’s shocking that you think that Fetterman is the reason for 2-hour votes. The briefest look at the pre-Fetterman senate is could have immediately set you straight.

        —

        Also, Schumer is proving that his return-to-session Dear colleague letters are meaningless.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mike, they are doing budget votes the rest of the week.

      The senate is also holding an all senators briefing with Volodymyr Zelensky, I think today, which is probably the reason for only 3 votes.

      After today the senate will be at 38 district and 8 appellate nominees confirmed this year with 10 more weeks to go. I expect them to continue making consistent progress in this same pattern, even though they likely won’t have several weeks dedicated to catching up the entire backlog like we would all like.

      Like

      • I swear the senate only works two full days a week, Tuesday & Wednesday, & it always seems like a world leader like Zelensky comes on of those two days. He couldn’t come on a Monday, Thursday or Friday. Or better yet any of the FIVE WEEKS the senate wasn’t in session. We could have gotten two more district court judges confirmed today… Uuuggghhh

        Like

  18. Let’s see how Welch will approach this vacancy. He’s an old Democrat, so I won’t assume he’ll be all over it, even if he’s on SJC.

    Crawford is another example of a state supreme court justice accepting an appointment to a district court. I would argue that his seat on the D.VT (a 2-member court) is more important than his seat on the supreme court, with its 5 members. Both courts have coterminous jurisdiction, but his federal judgeship pays better, has better benefits, and he is only one of two.

    If all 60-year-old appointees leave the bench at the right “political” time, I wouldn’t be so opposed to their nomination. But we know that doesn’t always happen. I don’t expect Irma Ramirez to retire after 11 years on the 5th.

    Like

  20. No particular reason I didn’t have him on my list. I will add him even though I think we can do better for Vermont.

    I’d prefer David Scherr (Rep. Becca Balint’s State Director and former General Counsel of the Vermont Cannabis Control Board; born c. 1983) or Eleanor Spottswood (Solicitor General of Vermont; born c. 1984).

    Like

  23. Anyone hear anything with Feinstein? I know she voted yesterday, but after she voted, I saw her sit at Schumer’s desk and a wheelchair was brought in, typically she’s able to walk out of the Senate chamber.

    Mark Kelly out today again too (was out yesterday). Last week was Duckworth with COVID, the week before Booker was out, though not sure why.

    Like

  26. Yeah, the cancelled meeting on 9/7 still counted as a holdover, which was why the nominees were able to be voted out on 9/14. I don’t think there was anything for the committee to vote on anyway, so no harm in cancelling the meeting.

    Also, reading the Senate Press Gallery Twitter feed, Mark Kelly is delivering a press conference on his visit to Ukraine tomorrow, which explained his absence today and yesterday. Wish we had some reporting on Feinstein’s absence today.

    And on that Vermont vacancy that opened up, it looks like he’s taking senior the first day he’s eligible for senior? If that’s the case, I was hoping Kayatta (the Maine seat on the First Circuit) would go Senior, I think he’s eligible in November, that’d give Biden five of the six appointments on that court!

    Like

  27. We’ve discussed the whole canceled business meeting/hold over thing many times before on the blog, so I’ll make it short.
    No. A canceled business meeting doesn’t automatically count as a hold over. It’s up to the entire minority to allow this.
    The standard process is for the nominations to be on the agenda and to be held over for an actual meeting.
    It make sense that tomorrow’s meeting is canceled since Feinstein is out again. (Senators are out all the time and we often don’t get additional explanation for it, beyond the “necessarily absent” language insert into the record.)

    So, if you want tomorrow’s canceled meeting to count as a hold over week, pray that the Republicans don’t object.

    I’ve noticed that if the cancellation/dropped nomination is based on Republicans having more questions for a nominee, the affected nominations are more likely to be counted as being held over. As opposed to when the cancellation is based on a Dem being out. (I’ve also seen a Durbin-absense cancellation count as a hold over, maybe because he’s chair?)

    At any rate, there are a lot of nominations on the floor ready for action, so no excuse!

    Like

  28. Senator Vance just objected to voice votes for several US attorneys including one from his one home state. Yet we are suppose to believe these senators are gonna work in good faith on judges with blue slips. That’s hilarious… Haaaaa

    “10:38 a.m. Senator Durbin spoke about drug costs and US Attorneys. He then asked for unanimous consent for the Senate to confirm the following nominations en bloc. Senator Vance objected.
    Todd Gee, of the District of Columbia, to be United States Attorney for the Southern District of Mississippi
    Tara K. McGrath, of Califonria, to be United States Attorney for the Southern District of California
    Rebecca C. Lutzko, of Ohio, to be United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio
    April M. Perry, of Illinois, to be United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.”

    Like

  29. Well the motion to proceed with the change in rule on the minibus appropriations failed to get 60 votes. Now Schumer is filing cloture on top military positions, changing from long standing precedent because of Tuberville. We’ll see how much time now needs to be spent on them.

    Like

      • @shawnee68

        Really, what planet are you living on? Are you reading something different from what I am typing? Like really, can you get just ONE reply right. Nowhere in my statement did I say judges are more important than national defense. I said these votes should be held “on Fridays or Mondays before 5pm only.”

        They do not vote on judges or anything else Fridays or Mondays before 5pm only. My God I really try to assume good faith in people but you’re pushing it. Like really

        Liked by 1 person

  31. Personally, I wish Schumer had filed cloture on all nominees the week before the August recess and threatened to cancel recess unless Tuberville lifted his hold. Just a ridiculous process that we have to hold our own military hostage over the objections of one senator.

    Like

  32. I can’t help but be annoyed at this entire Tuberville ordeal. The one aspect about elected Dem leadership that I hate so much is the “feigning helplessness” when they can do more to fix the situation. Seeing Dem senators tweet about how reckless the hold that Tuberville has kept on all military promotions is nothing but a complete joke. Chuck Schumer is the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate for crying out loud! He controls the senate schedule and agenda, which means that he can easily make Tuberville and the GOP pay for rank obstructionism. Hold the senate floor open all day and night and let the time pass while keeping the floor open for judicial nominees to confirm them at 1 a.m. when no one is there. Who is going to stop him?

    Play goddamn politics and use the time and opportunity to turn his supporters into enemies. Confirm 10 judges in a week and cut an ad in rural Alabama thanking Sen. Tuberville for helping Pres. Biden confirm 10 more liberal judges to district courts across the country. Put numerous billboards up off I-65 across Alabama about it and promise to confirm more judges with the help of Tuberville. JFC, playing politics isn’t that hard.

    What’s the point of consistently giving them power election after election if they aren’t going to utilize it. Biden could use march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole act to lower prescription drug costs for damn near any drug he wants (as long as it was funded by taxpayer grants) but he chooses not to. Biden could fly to the UAW strikes and make it clear that the Dem party firmly stands behind labor to not only improve people’s lives, but to win over more working-class individuals to vote for him in ’24, but also to create consistent Dem voters down ballot. I fully detest this weak and feckless neoliberal party that 85% of the Dem party has become because they have done a lot of good but absolutely f*cking suck at messaging and optics. Literally a photo op can do so much good, but alas, can’t even do that.

    It’s late September and we haven’t heard any rumors about a new 1st circuit nominee. Biden and Schumer are actively letting a retiring Ben Cardin hold the 4th circuit vacancy hostage. And I almost shudder to think about the career prosecutor Booker and Menendez will nominate to replace Judge Greenaway Jr. on the 3rd circuit. Not even going to allow myself to get bummed out when charlatans like Marsha Blackburn and Ted Cruz get to dictate who gets to be on their states circuit courts while Bumatay, Lee, Collins, Bress, VanDyke, etc. get put in California and Washington and Dem senators get told to pound sand. We get an old moderate in Ramirez for the 5th who will probably pull a Julie Carnes and probably will get an older moderate for the 6th circuit vacancy.

    Also, there are judicial emergencies in Florida and Texas and Durbin just gets to sit there like a bump on a log and tweet at his GOP senate mates to work in good faith while Rubio/Scott, Cornyn/Cruz get to run out the clock. Gone are the days of Myrna Perez, Nancy Abudu, Dale Ho, and Alison Nathan. Now we get Mehalchick and former AUSAs who STILL won’t get more than 3-5 GOP votes on a good day. Keep working in good faith Dems, I’m sure a future chairman Cruz or Hawley is going to let a Dem senator tell the committee and the GOP president which district court judge can and cannot be in their state lolololol.

    Like

    • Archaic senate traditions need to be retired. This is a new age, and the Senate GOP has no problem trampling on precedent to seize power. Blue slips can be modified to be taken under advisement by the SJC, but should not be a veto for any one senator. Chuck Grassley made that very clear to Dem senators regarding their circuit court vacancies. Why not a little tit for tat with GOP district court vacancies? Why does one side get to tell you that your participation isn’t necessary when we’re in power, but then get to clutch their pearls and complain when they’re at the mercy of the other party? That isn’t fair governing (or governing at all) and that shouldn’t be the norm.

      Lindsey Graham made it very clear that if a 2016 SCOTUS nominee situation happened again, he would vote against it. Then it happened, and he didn’t give a shit and voted for Mrs. Handmaid’s Tale anyway. They quite literally rammed through a SCOTUS nominee while people were voting in the middle of a pandemic, and we can’t even get liberal judges in certain red states?!? Nah man, that math aint mathing.

      Give Durbin some less important chairmanship like Intelligence or HELP, we need a Pitbull as SJC chair. I wish Newson was in the senate, I would kill for a Dem that takes as much pride as he does in provoking and pissing off the GOP. Can you imagine a Dem chairman of the SJC that doesn’t wait for GOP senators to work in good faith? Well you’d have to imagine because that person doesn’t exist currently. Just a bunch of old moderate careerist Dems. The last Dem leader with a backbone was Harry Reid, he’s the reason the D.C circuit is liberal now (it is fair to say that SCOTUS is heavily conservative because of him firing the first shot in nuking the filibuster for judicial nominations), but I would argue that the GOP wasn’t going to always sit around and play patty cake with Dems on SCOTUS nominees, they were eventually going to want more hardliners on the court and they would have eventually nuked the filibuster to accomplish it. Harry Reid just beat them to it for lower court judges. And now we just need Durbin to stop simply expelling hot air and actually do something similar. It’s gonna happen eventually, so beat them to it and appoint judges before the ND-IL is filled with FedSoc hacks…(oh wait)

      Like

      • Frank is going to come on to say that voters (i.e. Frank!) doesn’t want the Democratic Party to be a GOP clone, which is why the Dems can’t be anything other than simpering weaklings.
        And I disagree on Newsome. He’s great on most things, except for the one thing I care most about: judges. That alone will make me vote against him in any primary for president.

        @Ethan
        I talked about that, too. It doesn’t surprise me that Durbin returned a blue slip on Pacold. And Frank, the font of ancient wisdom in here, supplied that Duckworth, like all junior senators since the history of our republic, wouldn’t go against the senior senator, who’s also in leadership. (I exaggerate only slightly.)

        Liked by 1 person

  35. Again gavi i applaud you for your straight talk and calling out people.
    The answer is simple and isn’t hard to come up with. Biden and the white house in particular are cowards at heart who lack political courage, their guiding principle in politics is how do we not offend republicans and avoid their temper tantrums, rather than how do we exercise this power given to us by voters for the better.

    1. He was afraid to replace republican jay powell because he was scared of the blowback and resistance from GOP senators. Whereas, trump quickly booted out janet yellen and didn’t renominate her when by all accounts she was doing a good job and the economy was strong.

    2. He had the option to pick doug jones or sally yates as AG but picked garland a cowardly man who was slow to react to trump crimes and dragged his feet, a clueless pondering judge and should never have been nominated to this position. Trump on the otherhand nominated racist jeff session and henchman bill barr who was in trump corner and acting as his personal lawyer.

    The second a desantis or trump gets back in with a senate GOP Majority the district court slips are as likely over with.

    Liked by 2 people

    • @aangren

      There’s nothing likely about Republicans ditching blue slips once they are back in full power. Blue slips are as good as gone. Republicans know what to do with power when they have it, they use it. Durbin better enjoy all the blue slips parades he can now. Republicans won’t be as stupid to keep them once back in power.

      Like

  37. @Gavi

    Good news. Durbin is “concerned”. Is he concerned about only six district court nominees so far this year from red states? Or about us having to waste senate floor time to confirm military personnel instead of judges? Or about any number of frowning threats to our democracy because of rogue if not out right corrupt Supreme Court justices? NOPE… But he is concerned about THIS however…

    (https://www.yahoo.com/news/durbin-no-2-senate-democrat-142433379.html)

    Like

    • Good gracious let’s worry about the dress code. I’d rather Sen Schumer enter the senate chamber with a Beavis & Butthead T-shirt and baseball cap on sideways if it meant more judges would be confirmed.

      I’d have more respect if Durbin was more worried about the senate fantasy football league (assuming there is one) than something as trivial as a dress code when there are real important issues to be worked on

      As far as a dress code, you’ve probably seen changes in your offices. Years ago, casual day was usually Fridays only. Now, most offices are casual dress everyday, it’s just the nature of where the work world is heading, as the US Senate is no different

      Like

      • @Rick

        Exactly. It’s so irritating & frankly insulting that with all the things to be “concerned” with, this is the breaking point for the chairman of the SJC. It’s almost October & we don’t have double digit nominees for district court vacancies from red states in 2023. Some red states don’t have a judicial or US attorney nominee under Biden’s term despite vacancies for both. I swear I long for the day I vote FOR Democrats instead of AGAINST Republicans.

        Like

    • @Dequan
      HA!
      The dress code gets a concern from Durbin but everything else gets a parade!
      Sheldon Whitehouse should wear a bikini on the senate floor while holding a sign that read:
      “It’s more than concerning that only 6 Republican blue slips returned!”

      @aagren
      Dems have never quite figured out how to use power. It’s amazing that they still get elected.

      Like

      • I got a solution. Maybe we can dress blue slips up in a hoodie & put all six that have been turned in this year on the senate floor on a Friday & Saturday. That way Durbin can be “concerned” enough to do something about blue slips & be at work on a Friday & Saturday to confirm some judges all at once… See, problem solved… Haaaaa

        Liked by 1 person

    • Wasting time for confirming the most important leaders of the military is completely wrong in my opinion. I can’t imagine what here would be said, when there would be no judicial confirmation for nine months.
      With default closing and almost no confirmation by voice vote for months, and the military matter far from solved, some people here call for more judicial confirmations, where I would say under these circumstances 1 district judge last week an 2 district judges this week is not that bad.

      I wouldn’t expect Newman has prevailed, the irrational behaviour on 375 pages speaks against that. She’s dreaming of returning and prevent false decisions by her collegues for the last three or four years she had and hiring new law clerks. Difficult to imagine, how they should work together in the future. I expect there is more dirty laundry to come. Surely she should have retired years ago with a clear mind. But now it is too late.

      The dresscode matter is futile facing the problems who are piling up.
      But I hope Susan Collins doesn’t appear in a bikini.

      Like

      • @Thomas

        I think you misunderstand what we mean by wasting senate floor time. We are by no means saying the military promotions are not important. We are saying the senate schedule is Monday 5pm to Thursday 5pm at best (Next week they aren’t even working on Monday. So that means anything that takes up senate floor time during those pressure few hours are taking away from other normal senate actions such as confirming judges, the budget & confirming other non-judicial nominees.

        If you noticed, nobody on this blog used the words wasted time initially when Schumer threatened to hold the senate in session over the weekend to confirm the military promotions. That’s because that would be a consequence for Tuberville & his Republican counterparts that are holding the promotions up. But now that Schumer has reversed course & is holding these votes on Wednesday & Thursday, that is regrading Tuberville. He even said it on the senate floor yesterday in his speech when he said he would rather hold individual votes on the military promotions instead of confirming more of President Biden’s liberal judges like the one we just confirmed (He was talking about Rita Lin).

        So no, i don’t think we should be rewarding (And encouraging) Tuberville for his holds. All military promotion votes that normally are confirmed in batch should be done outside of the normal senate schedule, so you don’t encourage repeat bad behavior.

        Like

  38. At this point, it’s too late to get rid of the blue slips. Dems would barely have time to benefit from it and get what, MAYBE 15-20 red state vacancies before the election and then Republicans have a green lane to fill up every blue state with FedSoc members because “the Dems started it”. Plus Manchin would probably vote with all 49 Reps whenever a red state nominee without a blue slip would be up for a vote.

    All 35 current nominees sitting around need to be confirmed for this year to not be kind of a disaster, especially compared to last year with their 50/50 control. And that’s coming from a guy who was defending the Dems all year but then again I thought they’d clean the plate by the end of Summer since the GOP House was passing clown show bills.

    Boy do I feel stupid.

    Like

    • I think it’s pretty reasonable to expect all current nominees (minus Colom of course) to be confirmed prior to the end of the year. We are quickly getting to the point in the calendar where any future nominees will likely not get a floor vote until January.

      I agree, that should more or less be the baseline expectation at this point.

      (This is not a prediction or guarantee, I’m just saying that this is a reasonable standard to hold the senate too).

      Like

    • @CJ

      That would only help in purple states like Wisconsin & Montana. It wouldn’t help in red states because even in states in which one Republican senator was working in good faith (Such as Mississippi), that senator would surely stand in solidarity & simply not turn in their blue slip to stand with their fellow senator. So it wouldn’t be worth the change for just a couple of seats.

      This is the bottom line. 50 years from now blue slips will not exist. It comes down to who will get rid of them first. Republicans were first to filibuster a SCOTUS nominee back when LBJ nominate Abe Fortus for Chief Justice. Republicans got rid of the filibuster for SCOTUS nominations. Republicans got rid of blue slips for circuit court seats. Republicans invented a rule that you can’t confirm a SCOTUS justice during an election year yet four years later confirmed one after voting had already started.

      If you think Republicans are going to get into power after trying to overturn the last election that they lost & have a President Trump or DeSantis, Democrats do not turn in their blue slips for 40 or 50 district court vacancies & Republicans are just going to stand around & leave blue slips in place because of tradition please let me know. I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. It’s a real cheap price. Oh, don’t worry about the words Brooklyn Bridge written on it, the bridge is yours. Just Zelle me the money… Haaaa

      Like

      • “50 years from now blue slips won’t exist”

        Blue slips probably won’t exist in Jan 2025 if Trump wins and Republicans control the senate.

        Also, don’t be shocked if Republicans add seats to not only Circuit courts, but SCOTUS as well.. They’ll jam the courts with the worst of the worst Federalist Society members. I would not put ANYTHING past Republicans if they regain power in 2025. It truly would be terrifying..

        This ain’t your fathers Republican party anymore. The days of the reasonable Republicans like Dwight Eisenhower, Jacob Javits, Gerald Ford, John Heinz, Nelson Rockefeller, and a few others exist only in textbooks, history museums, & the History Channel

        Like

      • @Rick,
        When I met Senator Ossoff and asked him if he thought blue slips would stick around, he said he thought that they would, proceeding to ask “there may be more vacancies in red states right now, but do you really want Republicans being able to pick judges for the Southern District of New York without veto?”

        I wanted to reply (but didn’t have time) with “yeah but I don’t think any judges appointed by Democrats in those districts would voluntarily leave the bench under a Republican President.”

        Like

  42. I’d like to see the two Louisiana nominees get the same treatment too. Probably wishful thinking because Papillion had a floor vote. But those seats are very much judicial emergencies.

    Like

    • I could honestly see a floor vote for Papillion being fair. He was (And probably still will be by the end of the year) Biden’s best red state district court nominee to date. His SJC Q stated senator Kennedy first reached out to him for the 5th vacancy. You all know how big I am when it comes to age but to be honest had Biden gone with him over Dana Douglas I wouldn’t have had one problem with it despite him being 7 years older.

      I doubt Edwards & Long will get voice votes but it would be nice to see Kennedy push for it. Anything to try & get back done if the floor time we just spent on the military nominees.

      Like

  43. I love it. Tuberville is openly claiming victory & throwing it in Schumer’s face & he’s absolutely correct. Schumer most certainly “blinked”. And guess what… The senate adjourned today at 4:43pm. They will not work tomorrow, Saturday & as a matter of fact they are not returning until Tuesday at 5:30pm.

    Schumer threatening to work over the weekend was an absolute joke. Two freaking days spent on military promotions & these clowns high tailed out of town at 4:43pm. I’m so disgusted. Tuberville won as a college football coach & is now winning as a first term senator in politics. Mitch McConnell wouldn’t have had none of this if the shoe was on the other foot. It sucks losing, I hate it…smh

    (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/tuberville-forces-schumer-s-hand-in-military-nominee-votes-he-blinked/ar-AA1h4h27?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=305e6d6fb5d74d25a676eab724400ca7&ei=13)

    Like

    • Tuberville right but he also was in a no lose situation. He forces a vote and Dems vote for the nominees, or he forces a vote and Dems vote against Bidens own nominees. Chuck pushing all 3 joint chief votes to try and claim it as a compromise or win is his attempt to save face.

      I think the only difference here is that Dems would never have a months long hold on all military promotions because A as a group they want Gov to work and B Dems can’t get away with things like Reps can, if a Dem did this it would be political and maybe literal suicide as Fox would’ve had a daily counter and accuse Dems of trying to destroy the military to their unhinged viewers.

      I think a lot of people get mad at Dems for not being exactly like Reps but if they were they’d lose a lot more elections. People expect the GOP to be racist, to be homophobic, to be fanatical and irresponsible…there’s an argument to be made that if Dems were the same that wouldn’t help with tight races it’d just blur the lines for people who don’t follow politics daily.

      Let the Tuberville keep going, have him hold over 1,000 officers and we’ll see who the pro-military GOP and their voters ultimately blame in 2024. And if nothing else, I’d think leftists would love to see disorder and chaos at the pentagon.

      Like

      • I don’t want Democrats to be like Republicans. I don’t even want them to care. I just want them to pretend they care. This was a perfect opportunity. Schumer threatened to work through the weekend. What did we get instead? Three miliary nominees confirmed in two days & then they high tailed out of town at 4:43pm. This would have been the perfect day to work until 10 or 11 pm confirming judges or anybody else. Just show Tuberville you are not gonna let him waste senate floor time & the senate will stay to confirm as many nominees as they would have if there wasn’t a hold. For God’s sake they are off Monday so today of all days would have been perfect. But nope, 4:43pm & they are out.

        I remember in 2018 when Mitch McConnell threated to hold the senate in session through recess to confirm judges the Democrats agreed to confirm 16 judges in one day. You know why? Because when McConnell threatens to hold the senate in session, people know he means business. When Schumer makes the same threat, people know he means 4:43pm on Thursday.

        Trump is going to Detroit to stand with union workers that are striking. He’s not doing that because he cares. Trump couldn’t give two shits about those striking union workers. He’s doing it because he’s pretending to care. Republicans are great at that & there’s a small (But large enough) segment of the population that eats that kind of crap up. Democrats can take a page out of their book in that respect.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mike isn’t this just more excuses for Dems being lame? As you said earlier, you were one of the major boosters of all the nominations this senate would complete processing by now. It’s nice to see you’ve revised your prediction down to reality.
      The fact is, this is nothing but a loss for Schumer. As Dawson said earlier, Dems always pretend (or maybe they really believe it?) that their hands are tied and they have no option but to endure Republican’s bad behavior. If Dem voters keep buying this powerlessness, then what incentive do Dem politicians have to change?
      No one wants Dems to match Republicans pound for pound in baseness, but my god, can’t they fight back?

      I’m ashamed watching that video. It’s embarrassing.
      Tuberville is doing his victory lap while Dems rush to go home.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Would you all rather see Sinema and Manchin become Republicans and give them the majority in the Senate so the Democrats can’t confirm any more judges or do anything else meaningful that requires a Senate vote? There’s nothing Schumer can do with his crop of senators that has no interest in “making a point”. They have families (or lobbyists) to go see:

        Like

    • @Frank

      Definitely lobbyists to go see for those two… Lol

      Oh very good news. I wish Judge Patricia Campbell Smith well. I was reading the SJC Q for Philip S. Hadji & see that he initially interviews with Brown & Portman for the vacancy on 2021. Since he was nominated earlier this year I’ll assume the White House as several others waiting for any vacancy to the court.

      On a side note senator Cassidy also recommended him for the vacancy. So he had the backing of a Democrat & two Republican senators. No wonder he got a voice vote yesterday.

      Like

  46. I agree, at the very least I would like to see decline to run for re election. New Jersey can do better.

    In the short term, I really hope this doesn’t delay a potential 3rd Circuit pick! Perhaps a potential nominee is already in the pipeline.

    Like

  47. Really disappoint with Dems playing with an otherwise save blue seat. I really hope Schumer and others are lobbying Menendez to not run again. (I always assumed that Menendez was running again to give his son more time in the House before he can run to replace the father in the senate.)

    Thankfully Menendez’s upcoming charges are in SDNY, so a 3rd Circuit pick would, in theory, have nothing to do with the investigation, if the prosecution stays in NY. But, of course, that probably wouldn’t stop Republicans from trying to taint the nominee with his indictment. As if they need more reasons to oppose Biden’s judicial nominees.

    Where is Senator Brutus Gillibrand when you need her? She should lead the charge against him to help put pressure on him to abandon his 2024 reelection plans. But I suspect she’ll be too focus on her own.

    Liked by 1 person

    • @Gavi

      Exactly. Gillibrand wants to stand up to get one of (In my opinion THE) best Democrat senator we had at the time for stupid pictures he took before I was born. But now when we have an actual corrupt senator who (Unlike Franken) is horrible on judges, not a peep. Makes me not like her even more because she’s not even consistent.

      Like

      • @Frank

        You’re 100% correct. The two situations are completely different. One senator took unacceptable pictures over 30 years ago & has led an issue free adult life ever since. The other senator has been indicted twice in the past six years with charges dropped the first time only because of a hung jury, & now is indicted a second time with enough evidence against him to make Trump blush. Definitely two different situations

        Like

      • What Franken did was not ok. However, a lot of people in power have done worse. Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Joe Biden, & Donald Trump all have far worse accusations of SA. A jury found that Trump did SA E. Jean Carroll. Several senators such as Strom Thurmond, Dan Inouye, & Ted Kennedy were sexual predators but they were not held accountable.

        Al Franken’s actions are tame compared to the actions everyone else I’ve named in this comment.

        Like

  48. I can’t believe Chucks didn’t file clotures for anyone while Scotts going to be in Cali for the debate.

    @Gavi I suppose it’s an excuse if your idea of a solution was to keep the senate in session during the August recess to vote on each military nominee but that would also be a win for Tuberville.

    He’s literally said either overturn the policy or vote on each nominee individually, the only win for Dems is if he’s shamed or pressured into removing his hold which he won’t be so because he’s a MAGA republican who doesn’t care if it all burns down. Sidenote: I love that Biden gave him that only gut punch he could by keeping Space Force in Colorado.

    It’s like watching half the Brazilian rainforest be on fire and being mad at 51 firefighters for not putting it out. My main announce with Dems is not confirming more judges, I’m in absolute awe of how many major pieces of legislation they passed in 2 years when they had the House.

    For all the praise we give Mitch, all his managed in 4 years was judges and a corporate tax cut (the First Step program was just Trump telling him what to do because Kanye & Kim buttered him up).

    Democrats are good at governance that helps America, Republicans are (mostly) good at governance that helps their team. This is the reason to vote.

    Like

    • Mike,
      This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the Republican Party. Passing one piece of major legislation (a tax cut!!!) and confirming high numbers of judicial nominees is not considered a waste. This is excellent governing for them. It’s called conservativism for a reason. Republicans never feel the need to legislate as much as Dems. Dems need to expand this and expand that. By that standard, McConnell’s Senate did exactly what it needed to do, tax cut, lower court judges, and 3 SCOTUS justices. That’s a whopping success.
      Democrats have been trying to weaponize Republicans’ lack of legislating long before Truman tried to capitalize on it with the nickname he gave the 80th Congress, the Do Nothing Congress. Since Dems love to do so much, all we are asking is for them to fight back! Schumer’s party loves to govern, so let them govern—on a weekend, as he threatened to do.
      Is that really so revolutionary?

      I also like to point out that I didn’t say they should have stayed over the August recess to confirm judges. I just wasn’t naïve enough to assume they’d be able to clear the deck by now. And more importantly, I do not think that he needed the recess to confirm those nominees if they just spent a bit more time in DC during their regular session, yes, including the occasional weekend.

      Demand more from your government.

      Like

  49. I was the one who floated the idea of canceling August to confirm military nominees. I still think it would be good politics, even if it would be a colossal waste of everyone’s time. But What better way to send a message to America than canceling vacation to vote overtime on the most popular nominees imaginable while the GOP scurries away and whines about it? It certainly would have ratcheted up the pressure on Tuberville

    Like

  50. I haven’t seen a nominations hearing posted for next week. Are they going to wait until the 4th to get the five nominees that were officially submitted to the Senate all on one hearing and not have to break them up into two?

    The issue with that though is that if the hearings are combined, you’d have no one for a possible hearing on the 18th of October (they’re out the week in between for Columbus Day). If we do still have separate hearings, the next possible hearing after the 18th would be November 1; the White House would have until 10/4 to get nominees in for that slot.

    On the Menendez situation, I believe he is stepping down as FRC chair, which in itself I think is an upgrade. If that’s the case, the next FRC chair looks to be Jeanne Shaheen? Cardin is next in seniority on that committee but he already chairs Small Business, Shaheen currently doesn’t chair any Senate committee.

    Like

    • No nominations hearing is posted next week because we need more nominees. Remember There are 8 nominees that need a hearing but three aren’t even eligible yet. Scott Colom doesn’t have both home state senators’ blue slips turned in. Park & Sherriff have not had their nominations sent to the senate for whatever reason.

      We do however have an executive meeting scheduled for Thursday. The names are in black, not in red so I hope that means they count yesterday’s cancelled meeting as holding over the 4 nominees so we can get them voted to the floor Thursday instead of waiting another week.

      (https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/committee-activity/hearings/09/21/2023/executive-business-meeting)

      Like

      • IIRC Sherriff won’t be sent to the Senate until de Alba is confirmed. I remember the same scenario when John Lee was appointed to the 7th Circuit, his successor on the NDIL wasn’t sent to the Senate until Lee was confirmed, and I think another example was Todd Edelman, he wasn’t formally nominated to the DC District Court until Pan was officially confirmed to the DC Circuit. For Parks, how often are confirmation hearings held for a nominee whose seat won’t open up for a year?

        For the business meeting, I wonder about Feinstein’s status, she did miss a couple of votes this week (she voted for cloture on Oliver on Monday before sitting down at Schumer’s desk and then being wheelchaired out of the chamber, missed the Tuesday judicial nominee votes, voted for the failed rule suspension on Wednesday for the minibus and didn’t vote on any of the military promotion votes). No one online seemed to point it out, I was almost certain that Twitter would freak out the second she missed a single vote upon returning. Based on confirmation hearings, the only nominee with a chance I think to be a party-line vote is Lee (NDCA), if she does get Graham, they wouldn’t need Feinstein at that meeting.

        Best case scenario is that maybe they told her to stay home and wouldn’t need to vote on military promotions that get 90+ votes? Kind of like pulling your starters out of a football game when they’re up by several touchdowns in the 4th quarter. I haven’t seen any reporting on the missed votes which I’m sure the media would have been all over that as well.

        Like

      • We need to disprove the notion that Biden can’t send a nominee’s nomination to the senate until the seat is officially vacant. There is absolutely no rule whatsoever that says he has to wait for de Alba to be confirmed to send Sherriff’s nomination to the senate.

        Biden himself has gone against this thinking. He not only sent KBJ’s nomination to the senate while justice Breyer was confirmed, but she herself was confirmed & waited months before Breyer stepped down. There are no different rules for SCOTUS & lower court expected vacancies.

        But if you want a recent circuit court vacancy example no problem. We can go back 3 years. Justin Walker was nominated April 3, 2020, the nomination was sent to the senate May 4, 2020 & he was confirmed June 18, 2020. Guess when Thomas Griffith left the DC circuit to actually vacate, he seat? September 1, 2020, a full 75 days later. Let me say that again. Just 3 years ago Justin Walker was confirmed a full 75 days before the seat actually became vacant for a circuit court seat.

        So please lets al recognize there is no rule preventing Biden from sending any nominees nomination to the senate. This is strictly a Biden WHC thing.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment