Seth Aframe – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

After the withdrawal of their first nominee to fill the final vacancy on the First Circuit, former New Hampshire Attorney General Michael Delaney, the Biden Administration is trying again with federal prosecutor Seth Aframe.

Background

Born in Boston, Massachusetts in 1974, Seth Robert Aframe received a bachelor’s degree summa cum laude from Tufts University in 1996 and then received a J.D. from Georgetown University in 1999. Aframe then clerked for Justice Judith Cowin on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court before joining Choate Hall & Stewart in Boston as an Associate.

In 2003, Aframe moved to New Hampshire to clerk for Judge Jeffrey Howard on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. In 2007, he became a federal prosecutor with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire where he currently serves as Appellate chief and Chief of the Criminal Division.

History of the Seat

Upon the recommendation of New Hampshire Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan, Aframe has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This seat opened when Judge Jeffrey Howard took senior status on March 31, 2022. On January 18, 2023, former New Hampshire Attorney General Michael Delaney was nominated to fill this seat. However, Delaney faced bipartisan opposition based on his role in defending St. Paul’s School against a lawsuit brought by a plaintiff alleging sexual assault at the school and withdrew on May 18, 2023. Approximately a week after the withdrawal, Aframe reached out to Shaheen expressing his interest in the position. After interviewing with the senators and then with the White House in July 2023, Aframe was nominated on October 4, 2023.

Legal Experience

After a clerkship, Aframe started his career at Choate Hall & Stewart in Boston, where he worked in commercial litigation. For example, Aframe represented Lucent Technologies in defending against a disability discrimination claim brought by a former employee who was dismissed for allegedly falsifying company records. See Desando v. Lucent Technologies, 193 F. Supp. 2d 358 (D. Mass. 2002).

After an extensive stint as a law clerk at the First Circuit, Aframe joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire, where he has served for the last sixteen years. He started in the Civil Division of the office. Since 2010, Aframe has served as the Appellate Chief of the U.S. Attorney’s Criminal Division, in which capacity he has argued approximately 100 cases before the First Circuit, in addition to trying several cases in the District of New Hampshire. Among his trials, Aframe was lead counsel in a ten day money laundering and conspiracy trial involving a fraudulent scheme to convert fraudulent proceeds into bitcoin. See United States v. Freeman, 21-cr-41-JL (D.N.H.)

Among Aframe’s notable appeals, he successfully defended a trial verdict of guilt wherein the defendant was a physician who had received kickbacks to prescribing a fentanyl spray to his pain patients. See United States v. Clough, 978 F.3d 810 (1st Cir. 2020). The First Circuit, in affirming the verdict, found that the government need not prove an explicit connection between the fees received by the physician and the prescriptions in order to prove a conspiracy. See id. In another notable case, Aframe successfully defended a conviction under the federal cyberstalking statute against a First Amendment challenge. See United States v. Ackell, 907 F.3d 67 (1st Cir. 2018).

Outside the criminal context, Aframe successfully persuaded the First Circuit that the Department of Health and Human Services had appropriately withheld internal emails and redacted portions of manuals produced in a Freedom of Information Act request relating to the provision of a grant to Planned Parenthood. See New Hampshire Right to Life v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, 778 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 2015).

Political Activity

Aframe has two donations to his name, one to Democratic gubernatorial candidate Colin Van Ostern, and one to Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.

Overall Assessment

If there is one lesson that the Biden Administration can take away from the loss of the Delaney nomination, it is that unexpected issues can sometimes tank otherwise qualified nominees. Aframe, like Delaney, has extensive legal experience in the New Hampshire community and is generally well-respected. However, unlike Delaney, Aframe’s confirmation hearing focused largely on issues of sentencing that are unlikely to draw Democratic opposition. As such, while Aframe, at least barring the unexpected, looks favored to join the federal bench in due course.

71 Comments

  1. dequanhargrove's avatar

    Harsh didn’t mention a couple of things in the write up that is the reason I gave Aframe an A+. He oversaw complaints of election fraud and abuse of voting rights in connection with the Justice Department nationwide Election Day Program.He literally went to polls in person to protect voters rights. He also worked on the LASER Docket, prioritizing treatment over punishment for certain low-level drug offenses.

    Like

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      Absolutely. Let me just say Seth Aframe is yet another rebuke of people on this blog such as @shawnee68 who tells us to go along just to get along. Time & time again conservatives show that when you fight crap nominees, if they are defeated, they are almost always replaced by a better nominee.

      Democrats are finally waking up to this. We saw it for the New York Court of Appeals (Their highest court) chief justice vacancy when Hochul tried to nominate basically a Republican. We just saw it worked for the vacancy on the 4th. Nicole Berner must be light years better than whatever bland nominee Cardin was pushing for.

      Thank God it worked here for this vacancy. As soon as Michael Delaney was nominated, I wrote right here on this blog how underwhelmed I was. The complete opposite is true for Aframe who is a spectacular nominee.

      Liked by 2 people

    • PW's avatar

      Yes, they stated he was too lenient especially on a particular rape trial. However, if researched, they would note that a middle age man received three back to back sentences for the maximum number of years(I believe it was 30 years each) making him 90+ years old before being up for parole.

      Like

  5. Gavi's avatar

    History of the Seat =/= history of the vacancy

    I wonder why Harsh skipped Aframe’s write up, until now, for some more recent nominees.

    The 1st Circuit will indeed be the Biden circuit when he’s done appointing almost all it’s judges. I’m impressed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      It certainly helps that Trump got 0 appointments on the 1st circuit (and will likely still get none even if he gets another 4 years in 2024). Meanwhile, if Trump wins in 2024 he is likely to make several appointments to the Federal Circuit, the only other circuit court with no Trump judges.

      Like

  7. CJ's avatar

    I just did some math and found that if all Circuit Judge nominees are confirmed, plus a nominee to the 6th CCA, that would bring the number of Democratic nominated Circuit Judges from 82 to 89. This would reduce the GOP nominated Circuit Judge majority from 91 – 82 to a 1 seat majority of 90 – 89. Meaning if just 1 more GOP nominated Circuit Judges creates a vacancy during Biden’s term, Democratic nominees would take majority of Circuit Court seats.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Hank's avatar

    Aframe is fine and I’m glad this seat is still getting filled, but he’s hardly an exciting or particularly progressive nominee. The election stuff and drug treatment stuff seems like standard center-left AUSA stuff, but the fact that he’s a career prosecutor likely (though admittedly not always) means he’ll probably be somewhat conservative on criminal issues.

    My guess is that Aframe will end up close to where Lynch is – so a Dem appointee who is on the conservative end of CA1. He’ll hopefully be a little to the left of Howard (though he was Howard’s law clerk for an unusual 4 years, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up just as conservative as Howard on a lot of issues). Given that Gelpi has proven to be more conservative than his predecessor, it’s interesting/disappointing that Biden hasn’t really moved CA1 to the left despite having nominated 5/6 judges.

    Like

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      @cJ

      That would be great. Perhaps one of the judges on the 8th will finally leave the bench.

      @Hank

      Aframe’s background seems to be more liberal than Gelpi’s was. I gave Gelpi a B+ back when he was nominated to add some context. Of course we never know how a nominee will turn out on the bench so all we have to go on is what we have seen so far. Aframe seems to be pretty liberal for the state he represents.

      Like

      • Hank's avatar

        Gelpi was a former federal defender, had criticized SCOTUS’s decisions in the Insular Cases for the nonsense that it was, and blocked PR’s ban on gay marriage, so folks probably thought he’d be more liberal than he’s turned out to be.

        Aframe is a career prosecutor, albeit one who doesn’t seem like a law-and-order type. Hard to argue that he has a more progressive track record than Gelpi, but I agree that he’s about what we’d expect from centrist old white senators like Hassan and Shaheen. I doubt he’ll get more than the Graham/Murk/Collins trio though, and maybe not even Graham.

        Also, Blackburn embarrassed herself even more than usual at Aframe’s hearing when she was arguing with him about sentencing and didn’t even know the law on sentencing maximums. She really makes the Senate dumber just by her continued presence.

        Like

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        But remember Gelpi was nominated by GW Bush. So I never saw him as somebody who wasn’t at least centrist enough for a Republican president to nominate to a seat with no blue slips in play.

        Blackburn is a disgrace. That’s why I was disappointed to see senator Peters comments that they are going to target Cruz & Scott in next years Texas & Florida senate races but he didn’t mention Tennessee.

        Like

      • Hank's avatar

        PR doesn’t have blue slips, but neither party has really nominated very ideological nominees there (the Rs just took issue with Mendez-Miro because she’s LGBT and they’re bigots). I agree with your point on the Bush nomination though.

        I just don’t think a career prosecutor is ever going to be a fantastic nominee from a progressive point of view – at most they’ll be fine but uninspiring, which is what Aframe is. I’m just glad Shaheen/Hassan didn’t pull a Cardin and drag the process out.

        Tennessee is far more conservative than Texas or maybe even Florida, so yeah we’re stuck with Blackburn for a while unfortunately. We just need millennials to stop moving to Brooklyn or Denver and all flock to Nashville and Memphis instead.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Aiden's avatar

      This is a very good analysis, and i think something thats not discussed. Which is how the nominations how actually translate in terms of changing the ideology of the court. I think so far montecalvo was definitely more liberal than her predecessor but still not enough to change anything. I agree Gelpi has being disappointing.
      I think its not clear how aframe will rule but he is replacing lynch who votes on the conservative side of some split en banc polls.
      So if anything itll be aframe, that if liberal, shows a shift in the court. I dont think we can just say because he was a career prosecutor he will be conservative on criminal issues there are plenty of public defenders that vote conservatively and vice verse. This was explored by a former cheif justuce of the New York Court of Appeals.
      Though Aframe will seem to be at least centre left. Especially as those voting things and laser court he choose to take reflect ideology.
      But im very nervous and share your concern. About ig a real lack of ideological change. In a court that should of changed

      I think the 4th circuit with Berner will show real change considering some current split polls.

      I think the 2nd has seen really good change, and i think 9th has a new solid progressive wing, but not enough for full change.

      Like

      • Thomas's avatar

        At a diverse court, there are not only progressive and very liberal judges sitting, and NH is none of that.
        So Gelpí is no flaming liberal, he’s a former public defender and there are now two at the First Circuit, and Rikelman is a reproduction specialist – that’s a very good mix in my opinion and complaining on that level requires looking to the Fifth or the Eight Circuit.

        Like

      • Ryan J's avatar

        Aframe will be replacing Howard, not Lynch. Howard is a GOP appointee and I would assume Howard is to the right of Lynch.

        I know you disagree with me to an extent but I still hold that none of Biden’s 9th circuit nominees are as liberal or as strong as Berzon/Fletcher/Paez.

        I think the main benefit of Berner is just getting the seat filled. Diana Motz was pretty liberal and I don’t think we would see much change with Berner being confirmed if Motz were patient enough to wait 2 1/2 years for Berner to be confirmed.

        Like

      • Aiden's avatar

        @Thomas, what we are saying is that the actually ideology of the 1st circuit has never being all that flaming liberal. In circuit splits we dont see it being like the 9th.
        Also the judges nominated have not pushed the court left. The court is still split 3-3 on criminal issues just as before. rikelman so far hasnt actually done anything so we will see. But she very sharply and skeptically questioned lgbt and trans rights in oral arguments. Its upto aframe and who replaces kayatta to see that real shift. Nominees dont matter unless they actually reflect that in rulings. Theres being conservatives who voted liberal etc.

        Like

      • Aiden's avatar

        @ryan j
        I just have to say thats wrong, the appointees have being extremely liberal. And i also think its a bit of unfair precedent especially with possibly comparing death penalty issues. As the supreme court is far more conservative with it’s binding precedent compared to what they had to deal with. Despite having more conservative scotus precedent theyve being so progressive.

        Also Brener is objectively so important with the circuit splits going on. Also she would still likely be more liberal on those anti trust and union issues. I think the 4th circuit would finally see that shift

        Like

  9. dequanhargrove's avatar

    With Nicole Berner now being the third person from the Demand Justice SCOTUS short list to be nominated to a federal judgeship by Biden, here’s my list of missed opportunities for others on the list who could have been nominated.

    Fatima Goss Graves – Any number of DC vacancies. She probably lives in either Maryland or Virgina so whichever state she lives in, both had multiple vacancies as well.

    Deepak Gupta – The DC circuit over Childs or Pan.

    Dale Ho – Even though he was nominated to the SDNY, I would have much rather him be nominated to teh 2nd or DC circuit. Biden has had a total of 10 vacancies on both courts.

    Melissa Murray – Same as Dale Ho above.

    L. Song Richardson – I won’t complain too much here because Biden did a really good job on the WDWA. But she was a possibility.

    Thomas A. Saenz – We all know he has complained about the lack of Hispanic nominees from Biden. I think Biden has done a lot better since his last letter of complaint. Perhaps nominating him would have ended those complaints.

    Cecillia Wang – I would have loved to have seen her picked over Lucy Koh. Especially since Koh could have been nominated to the Federal circuit after her husband stepped down from the SCOT-CA for his new job headquartered in D.C.

    (https://demandjustice.org/supreme-court-shortlist/)

    Like

  10. Joe's avatar

    As bad as Blackburn is, it’s not really worth investing any money into her race. Senate Dems may as well light money on fire.

    The better option by far of course Tester/BrownAZ/FL/TX but also shoring up PA, WI, NV, and MI. Outside of the senate there are 10-20 congressional races that will likely be very competitive and have a much great ROI as well.

    Like

  11. raylodato's avatar

    Judge Mauskopf from EDNY and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts is retiring.

    Since EDNY got an extra judgeship when she got the Administrative job, does anyone know if her leaving creates a vacancy, or if they will go back to 15 judges and not fill her seat?

    Like

  13. CJ's avatar

    I may be misunderstanding the situation, but considering the Supreme Court just affirmed section 2 of the voting rights act this year, why would the 8th Circuit strike it down? Wouldn’t that go against supreme court precident?

    Like

    • Aiden's avatar

      I the most concerning part of the precedent is the fact that some important parts were only 4 judges with Kavanaugh not joining the liberals. So if that compromise that Roberts and Kavanaugh did only to try to show legitimacy of the court. So theyd probably strike it down. It also i thijk had to do with different provisions.

      Also the latest oral atguments on a voting rights case was very skeptical towards liberals

      Like

  14. keystone's avatar

    Judge Beth Labson Freeman (NDCA) turns 70 today putting her one step closer towards being eligible for senior status. She’ll reach that milestone in February. IMO, she seems like a likely candidate to take it.

    If/when she announces, I hope she does it sooner than later since the CA senators are currently looking at candidates to fill Judge Davila’s San Jose seat and Judge Freeman is also based there.

    Since these seats sit in Sillicon Valley, I wonder if the CA Senators might be looking at candidates who have more of a focus on IP or Antitrust law as opposed to some of the progressive profiles we often talk about on here.

    Like

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      I wonder what’s taking so long to fill the San Diego vacancy. I get it, California has a new senator but it was a long time vacancy even before Feinstein passed away. Biden has named more than a handful of judges to that court so you would think they would have a running list to work from.

      Like

      • keystone's avatar

        Judge Curiel announced he was going Senior in Sept so it’s only been a couple months. They nominated Gaston back in January, so it’s prob been over a year since they were actively interviewing candidates for that area. Plus, I dont think the CA senators have the most efficient system.

        Even if the Senators had a candidate in mind, the WH still needs to interview that person, do a background check, etc.

        The timing on this one isn’t worrying me as yet. I think we’ll get some CA noms early next year.

        Like

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        I completely agree with you about how inefficient the California senators system is for Judd’s k vacancies. Having separate commissions for a state of over 40 million people is ridiculous. I hope that changes into a single commission with Padilla & Butler, followed by whoever replaces Butler.

        It’s almost guaranteed over a 4 year span all 4 districts & the 9th will have vacancies. They should have a running recommendation list similar to the 7 names Durbin & Duckworth sent.

        Like

      • Frank's avatar

        As some here have noted, even when seats are from the same duty station, there are usually completely different application processes when new openings occur. Thus, while it may seem as simple as picking from a preexisting list, it really is not. As keystone also noted, it has been some time since the previous nominations in Southern CA, so it will take time for the commissions to interview candidates and send them over to the WH. After that, it will take even more time to run background checks on them. There is still plenty of time in the blue states, and I wouldn’t be fretting yet about those seats being filled.

        Liked by 1 person

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        I’m not worried so much about the current vacancies such as SDCA being filled. I’m more worried about surprise vacancies in the latter half of next year getting filled. If we have a backlog of nominees & all of a sudden we get a few unexpected vacancies, Biden could leave a couple circuit court seats unfilled like Trump did with the 1st & 7th vacancies Biden inherited. Remember the senate will be out 5 weeks in the Summer followed by 6 weeks for the election. So every seat that can get filled in the next few months leaves room for surprise vacancies later next year.

        Like

  16. Gavi's avatar

    Today’s the tenth anniversary of Senator Harry Reid’s detonation of the nuclear option against the filibustering of all non-SCOTUS nominations. 52 Dems voted for this (with the 2 most pivotal votes being the California senators). 3 opposed.
    I supported this at the time. Over the years as Republicans did the same for SCOTUS and used the changes to confirm far right judges, I’ve wavered somewhat on this support.

    (Also, how great is it to have 55 senators in your caucus? You can basically lose 5 of those and still carry a nomination to confirmation with VP help or absences.)

    Maybe there will be other nuking anniversaries down the pike.

    Like

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        Haaaaaaa

        @Frank, I trust Republicans not to do that about as much as I did them not to filibuster a SCOTUS nominee for the first time like they did when LBJ nominated Justice Fortus. Or as much as I did for them not to eliminate the filibuster for SCOTUS nominations. Or about as much as I did for them not to hold a hearing for a SCOTUS nominee because it was an election year but then confirm a justice 4 years later after votes have already been cast. Or about as much as I did for them not to eliminate blue slips for circuit court vacancies.

        Shit I need friends like you. I could do just about anything bad & you would still be standing by my side saying he didn’t mean it… Lmao

        Like

    • Mike's avatar

      > (Also, how great is it to have 55 senators in your caucus? You can basically lose 5 of those and still carry a nomination to confirmation with VP help or absences.)

      I actually think the coolest part is 9 of them can be out sick and you’d still have a 46/45 majority.

      Like

      • Ryan J's avatar

        It would be great but it does mean having more senators like Manchin. With the number of Democrats who refuse to outright support gutting the filibuster (I suspect it’s more than just Manchin & Sinema), I think Dems would need a 60 seat majority to have enough senators to get rid of the filibuster, at which point there would no longer be a need to.

        Like

  17. Mike's avatar

    I’m looking at Trumps judges on the 9th circuit and wow, just one disaster after another.

    Biden should be shoving the most liberal nominees he can find down the Republican home senators throats just to give them a taste of their medicine next year.

    Liked by 1 person

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      1000% correct. The same Republican senator’s that refused to allow ANY Obama nominee onto the DC circuit with the filibuster were the same that were never going to work in good faith to allow circuit court nominees to get confirmed into their states.

      Ron Johnson made that clear first, holding the vacancy on the 7th hostage for six years. Now some of the same Democrats arguing against ending the filibuster are now arguing against ending blue slips for district court vacancies. As if the Republican senators today are more likely to act in good faith once they are in power again… smh

      Like

      • Ryan J's avatar

        Even if Leahy opposed getting rid of the filibuster for judges, he fell in line and voted to do so anyway (I suspect that’s what happened in Jan. 2022, it’s not just Manchin & Sinema who oppose getting rid of it — I also suspect that there are GOP senators who didn’t want to get rid of the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees but fell in line and voted to do so anyway)

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ethan's avatar

      @Rick, Of all the circuit nominees McConnell blocked during the Obama years, only one, Jennifer Puhl, was for the 8th circuit. The seat ended up getting filled by Ralph Erickson, who will be eligible for senior status on April 28, 2024. Puhl is still young enough (born c. 1974) to get the seat were it to become vacant again in the next decade or so.

      Besides Erickson, are several other 8th circuit judges eligible for senior status but it’s unlikely many (if any) will let Biden pick their successor:

      -Chief Judge Lavenski Smith (who dissented in the above case) is eligible now but no way he steps down before his term as Chief ends next year. If he does let Biden choose his successor, I’m hoping AUSA Cameron McCree (born c. 1980), one of his former clerks who is a Black man like him, would be the pick.

      -Judge James Loken has been eligible for a while. He’s more moderate than many of the other Republican appointed judges on that court but considering how long he’s been eligible to go senior, he seems like the type who wants to die on the bench.

      -Judge William Duane Benton isn’t as much of a firebrand as the Trump appointees (Stras, Grasz, and Kobes) or the Bush appointees that were on Trump’s SCOTUS shortlist (Gruender and Colloton), but he’s still a clear conservative. (*Fun fact, he was one year ahead of my mother at Northwestern University for undergrad and while she didn’t know him, I did find a picture of him in one of her old yearbooks).

      -Judge Bobby Shepherd was the only Magistrate Judge elevated to the circuit courts by George W. Bush. Just like Benton, he’s not as much a firebrand as Stras, Grasz, Kobes, Colloton, and Gruender, but he’s still a very clear conservative, as his son Matthew is the Republican Speaker of the Arkansas House of Representatives.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Rick's avatar

        @ Ethan

        Thank you for the nice writeup! I remember McConnell blocking all those judges from 2015-16, but didn’t remember the 8th Circuit one Puhl. Election night 2014 was an awful night, basically made Obama a 6 year president as the senate GOP only confirmed about 20 judicial nominees in 2 years

        The only one Obama got thru on that court was Jane Kelly and I think she was a consensus pick.

        Like

  21. keystone's avatar

    I found a talk that Judge Roger Gregory gave earlier this year to the UVA Black Law Student Association. It was about his career and the legacy of being the first black judge on the 4th Circuit.

    He discussed how he didn’t really want to be a judge and originally turned down the job when Clinton offered it to him. But his law partner was Doug Wilder, who was the first black governor in the US, and he told Gregory that he needed to do it b/c it was so important to break that barrier on the Court.

    At the time of the speech, Judge Gregory’s tenure as Chief Judge was nearing its end. He talked about how being Chief judge is a challenging job on its own but he had to do it at the height of Covid and how hard and stressful it was to keep all of the courts in the 4th Circuit functioning safely.

    “My successor will be Judge Diaz, who will do a wonderful job from North Carolina, but I told him I’m still
    counting the time. As a matter of fact, I would say that I wouldn’t take a million dollars for the experience of
    being chief. But I wouldn’t do it again for $2 million.”

    Also, very sadly, one his daughters died last year. His first wife also died very young. He’s experienced a bit of personal tragedy during time on the court.

    He’s had an impressive legacy and seems to have a tremendous sense of duty. I could see him taking Senior Status soon, if for no other reason, to get a well deserved rest.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Aiden's avatar

    Also recently the New York Court of appeals and the Wisconsin Supreme Court both heard redistricting cases this week or so.
    So far it looks good for democrats However on a different note.

    The Wisconsin Supreme court is probably the most partisan court in the nation.
    The oral arguments today, were very hard to watch. The Justices were completely disrespectful to each other on both sides, it was uncollegial and the court lacked legitimacy in this whole process.

    My concern is that with both sides having hyper partisan nominations to courts. That the federal courts will become like this. Seeing cracks in SCOTUS, 9th and the 5th.
    I know Justice Roberts has tried to seke consensus but i doubt if this continues it will hold. Its pretty shocking.

    With that I begin to question nominations such as Dale Ho for NY. Who have made the comments they have made. Also other republcian and democratic nominees all that further this issue

    Perhaps partisan nominees can still achieve collegiality and legitimacy for the court but im beginning to have doubts.

    Like

  24. raylodato's avatar

    @Aiden: I know we’ve moved onto another post, but I have to comment here. While collegiality is important, justice is more important. I’d rather have judges who stand for justice rather than constantly seeking collegiality with those who would limit civil rights at every opportunity.

    That said, the WI Supreme Court situation does seem quite partisan. I think the fact that the sitting justices, on both sides, saw fit to openly endorse candidates in the last election is not a good trend. Advocacy for particular candidates should be the role of the voters, not the jurists.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Douglas Hardacre's avatar

    Just watched Senator Blackburn detail some of Aframe’s decisions. Being so soft on pedophiles should scream loud and clear, that this person is morally reprehensible, and unfit to serve. I really struggle with how the Biden administration continues to promote morally bankrupt people to key positions. Do they want to destroy the Republic?

    Like

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      You can pick any few cases & make a narrative about an attorney. Aframe has a long career. But if we are going to let one case define an attorney or judge, Sarah Pitlyk gave a sex offender less time than the max. Senator Hawley recommended her & Trump nominated her. Is she soft on crime because of that one case? Some consider her one of Trump’s most conservative judges. That’s because you look at her ENTIRE career.

      Like

  26. Pingback: Judicial Nominations 2023 – Year in Review | The Vetting Room

Leave a reply to PW Cancel reply