Month: December 2023

Judicial Nominations 2023 – Year in Review

Last year, Democrats caught an unexpected break when they retained control of the U.S. Senate (and narrowly expanded their majority. This has allowed Democrats to confirm a number of stalled nominees from the previous Congress and continue an increase in the number of confirmations from the previous two years (all numbers are drawn from the Federal Judicial Center). While Democrats have had a number of successes on the judicial nominations front this year, work remains if they are to match President Trump’s numbers on the judiciary.

Nominations

In the first Congress of his presidency, Biden submitted 148 nominees to Article III courts to the Senate, of which 98 were confirmed.  In 2023, counting resubmissions from the previous Congress, Biden submitted 95 nominees to the Senate (and announced five more that are yet to be submitted). Biden particularly increased the number of district court nominees announced from states with Republican senators. In his first two years in office, President Biden nominated twelve district court nominees from states with Republican senators (four each from Ohio and Pennsylvania, and one each from Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, and Wisconsin).  In comparison, this year, President Biden has announced nineteen district court nominees from states with Republican senators (four from Florida, three each from Louisiana and Texas, two each from Indiana and Oklahoma, and one each from Kansas, Nebraska, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming).

Confirmations

In 2021, the Senate confirmed 40 Article III judges: 11 judges to the U.S. Court of Appeals; and 29 judges to the U.S. District Court.  The Senate subsequently confirmed 57 in 2022: 1 to the Supreme Court; 17 to the Court of Appeals; and 39 to the District Courts.

In 2023, the Senate confirmed 69 Article III judges: 11 judges to the U.S. Court of Appeals; and 58 to the District Courts.  While this continues an upwards trajectory from the previous two years, it nonetheless leaves Biden short of the total number of confirmations that Trump achieved by this point in his Presidency.

Withdrawal

From the previous Congress to this one, a few judicial nominees did not make the cut for renomination. Eastern District of Wisconsin nominee William Pocan had been blue-slipped by GOP Senator Ron Johnson, despite Johnson having previously signed off on him.  With Johnson narrowly re-elected and Democrats not changing the district court blue slip policy so far, Pocan was not resubmitted.

Northern District of New York nominee Jorge Rodriguez was also not renominated but as the judge he was nominated to replace, Judge David Hurd, declined to take senior status, expressing opposition to Rodriguez not being a Utica-based practitioner.

Furthermore, Tenth Circuit nominee Jabari Wamble was also not renominated, instead being resubmitted for a district court seat in Kansas, before withdrawing his name from that seat as well on the heels of an unfavorable ABA review.

The most high-profile loss, for the White House, however, was that of First Circuit nominee Michael Delaney, who withdrew his nomination in the face of bipartisan opposition relating to his conduct in litigation involving an allegation of sexual assault. A replacement nominee, Seth Aframe, currently remains pending before the Senate.

Diversity

The Biden Administration has continued its focus on prioritizing women and racial/ethnic minorities for court seats, seeking to do so to offset the lack of diversity in the nominees of previous administrations.  They have also continued to pick nominees from backgrounds that are traditionally less likely to become judges, including public defenders, and civil rights attorneys.

However, the Administration, in drawing more nominees from states with Republican senators, has nominated more “traditional” nominees as well, with the eight new appellate nominees being submitted in 2023, including five men and three women, and three white men being nominated this year, the same number of white appellate nominees submitted in the entire previous Congress.

Overall Assessment

Despite a narrow 50-50 margin in the Senate last Congress, Democrats were able to largely keep pace with the Trump Administration’s confirmation numbers.  Nonetheless, the narrow margin meant that a large number of liberal nominees remained stuck waiting for final votes. The slightly-wider margin that Democrats have this year has allowed almost all the stalled nominees to be confirmed, despite opposition to a number of them from Sen. Joe Manchin.  As such, the Biden Administration has largely cleared the backlog of stalled nominees from 2022, with only a handful left to be confirmed. Additionally, after the previous Congress focused almost entirely on states without Republican senators, the White House has focused more aggressively on those states this year, naming nominees in a number of those seats. Overall, the White House has managed to keep pace with confirmations from previous years and is likely to exceed confirmation numbers achieved by previous Democratic presidents although it remains to be seen if he can match President Trump’s numbers.

29 CommentsLeave a comment

Adeel Mangi – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

A long search to replace Judge Joseph Greenaway on the Third Circuit led the White House to civil attorney Adeel Mangi. If confirmed, Mangi would fulfill several firsts on the bench, being the first Muslim American and Pakistani American on the appellate bench, as well as the only judge on the bench currently not to practice law under a J.D.

Background

Born Adeel Abdallah Mangi in Karachi, Pakistan in 1977, Mangi received a B.A. from the University of Oxford in 1998 and a Postgraduate Diploma from the City University London Inns of Courts in 1999 before getting an L.L.M. from Harvard Law School in 2000. Mangi then joined Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP where he has served as a partner since 2010.

History of the Seat

Mangi has been nominated for a New Jersey seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated by Judge Joseph Greenaway. Greenaway, named to the district court by President Clinton in 1996 and to the Third Circuit by President Obama in 2010 stepped away from the bench on June 15, 2023.

The Biden Administration considered a number of candidates for the vacancy before zeroing in on Mangi. See David Wildstein, Adeel Mangi is Top Candidate for Third Circuit Court of Appeals Seat, New Jersey Globe, Nov. 6, 2023, https://newjerseyglobe.com/fr/adeel-mangi-is-top-candidate-for-third-circuit-court-of-appeals-seat/. The initial frontrunner for the seat was New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Fabiana Pierre-Louis, who took herself out of the running during the process. See id. Mangi, who previously interviewed for a district court judgeship under President Trump was brought under consideration in September 2023 and was nominated on November 15, 2023.

Political Activity

Mangi has a handful of political contributions to his name, including contributions to Biden and to Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Legal Experience

While he is a resident of Jersey City, Mangi has practiced at the New York City Office of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP for his entire legal career, starting there in 2000, where he has focused on complex civil litigation. During his career, Mangi has tried eight bench and jury trials, including two jury trials in a trade secrets dispute in which Mangi secured a $2 billion jury verdict. See Appian Corp. v. Pegasystems, Inc., No. 2020-07216 (Circuit Court of Fairfax Cnty., Virginia). In other notable cases, Mangi represented the pet food company Blue Buffalo in defending a false advertising suit. See Blue Buffalo Co. Ltd. v. Wilbur-Ellis Co. LLC et al., No. 4:14-cv-00859.

Mangi has also briefed and/or argued approximately 30 appeals before federal and state courts of appeal, including appellate litigation before the Third Circuit on behalf of Johnson & Johnson in a suit against Walgreen. See Walgreen Co. v. Johnson & Johnson, 950 F.3d 195 (3d Cir. 2020).

Setting aside the civil and commercial litigation he worked on, Mangi also handled a number of notable pro bono cases. Notably, Mangi was plaintiff’s counsel for the estate of Karl Taylor, an inmate who died in a New York correctional facility. See Ramsay-Nobles, et al. v. Keyser et al., No. 1:16-cv-05778 (S.D.N.Y.). After a two week trial, Mangi settled the case for approximately $5 million. Mangi also represented Muslim groups in the towns of Bayonne and Bernards in suits after permits for building mosques were denied in the towns, leading to settlements and construction of the mosques in both towns. See Bayonne Muslims et al. v. City of Bayonne et al., No. 2:17-cv-03731 (D.N.J.) and The Islamic Society of Basking Ridge et al. v. Townships of Bernards et al., No. 3:16-cv-1369 (D.N.J.).

Additionally, Mangi has submitted numerous amicus briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court. For example, Mangi filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Muslim Bar Association of New York in support of the gay and transgender plaintiffs seeking protection under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga. See 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020). Mangi also represented various Muslim bar associations in opposition to the Trump travel bans. See Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392 (2018). Additionally, on the circuit level, Mangi represented a coalition of religious organizations as amici in a suit regarding whether the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) permits money damages. See Landor v. Louisiana Dep’t of Corr. & Pub. Safety, 82 F.4th 337 (5th Cir. 2023).

Overall Assessment

As a relatively young nominee with a number of liberal pro bono representations, it is perhaps unsurprising that Mangi has already drawn significant opposition from the right. However, it is surprising that much of the opposition at Mangi’s confirmation hearing centered around allegations of antisemitism based not on any statements or positions taken by Mangi himself but rather by others. Mangi’s pro bono representations took fairly little oxygen during an otherwise contentious confirmation hearing. This was perhaps a recognition that there is little in Mangi’s actual legal record that is likely to draw opposition. Barring anything surprising emerging about Mangi himself, Mangi is likely to be confirmed and will likely be a left-meaning but relatively mainstream judge on the Third Circuit.

321 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Gretchen Lund – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana

Longtime Elkhart County Judge Gretchen Lund is the Republican-half of a package deal struck between the White House and Indiana Senators for the Northern District of Indiana.

Background

A native Hoosier, Lund was born in 1975, and grew up in the Goshen city area, graduating from NorthWood High School in 1994. After getting an B.A. from Butler University in 1998, Lund attended Valparaiso University School of Law, graduating in 2001. Following her graduation, Lund joined the Indianapolis office of law firm Ice Miller LLP before leaving a year later to clerk for Judge William Lawrence on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

After her clerkship, Lund became a prosecutor with the Elkhart County Prosecutor’s Office.

In 2008, Lund was elected to be a Goshen City Judge and, since, 2015, has served as a Elkhart County Superior Court.

History of the Seat

Lund has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. This seat was vacated on July 17, 2023, when Judge Jon DeGuilio moved to senior status.

Legal Experience

Lund has had a relatively limited legal career prior to becoming a judge. Her time consisted of a short stint as an associate at the firm of Ice Miller in Indianapolis and serving as a prosecutor for a year in Elkhart County, where she practiced in both the City Court and the Child Support Division.

Political Activity

Lund ran in her judicial race as a Republican. See Lund to Seek Judicial Post, The Goshen News, Jan. 23, 2007, https://www.goshennews.com/news/local_news/lund-to-seek-judicial-post/article_0dbbd4e5-da40-5777-b27b-75812d81bec3.html. Additionally, while in college, Lund worked for Indiana Senate Republicans Robert Garton and Marvin Riegsecker.

Jurisprudence

In 2008, Lund was elected and started as a Goshen City Judge, where she presided over criminal misdemeanors, city ordinance disputes, and traffic infractions. Since 2015, Lund has served on the Elkhart County Superior Court, which serves as a trial court of general jurisdiction.

Among the matters she presided over, Lund entered judgment against a plastic manufacturer for retaliatory discharge after a jury found in favor of a terminated employee. See Best Formed Plastics, LLC v. Shoun, 51 N.E.3d 345 (Ind. App. 2016). In another notable case on appeal from the City Court, Lund found the defendant guilty of public indecency and sentenced him to one year in jail, a harsher sentence than he had received in city court. See Morris v. State, 114 N.E.3d 531 (Ind. App. 2018). Lund’s sentence was affirmed by the Indiana Court of Appeals. See id. at 540. In contrast, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a portion of Lund’s sentence when she ordered that the sentence for a violation of Indiana’s habitual offender statute be served consequently to a driving under the influence sentence, finding that the habitual offender statute did not create a separate crime but rather a sentencing enhancement. See Weekly v. State, 105 N.E.3d 1133 (Ind. App. 2018).

Overall Assessment

Starting as a city judge and then a superior court judge, Lund has been on the bench most of her career, and Lund’s record suggests that she would be a fairly mainstream, if slightly right-of-center judge. As Lund was presumably the choice of Indiana senators for the bench, she should be confirmed easily.

43 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Cristal Brisco – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana

A fixture of the South Bend legal community who previously worked under then Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Judge Cristal Brisco has been nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.

Background

Brisco received a B.A. cum laude from Valparaiso University in 2002. Following her graduation, Brisco attended the University of Notre Dame Law School, graduating in 2006.

Brisco subsequently joined Barnes & Thornburg LLP, where she worked until 2013, when she became Corporation Counsel for the City of South Bend under then-Mayor Pete Buttigieg. After a brief stint as General Counsel at St. Mary’s College, Notre Dame, Brisco became a magistrate judge for the Circuit Court of St. Joseph County in 2018.

In 2021, Governor Eric Newsom named Brisco to the St. Joseph County Superior Court, where she currently serves.

History of the Seat

Brisco has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. This seat was vacated on January 23, 2021, when Theresa Lazar Springmann moved to senior status.

Legal Experience

Brisco began her legal career as an associate at Barnes & Thornburg. While there, Brisco frequently represented the City of South Bend as private counsel, including in defending suits brought against the South Bend Housing Authority. See, e.g., Fincher v. South Bend Housing Authority, 612 F. Supp. 2d 1009 (N.D. Ind. 2009). Brisco also represented the City as an employer in defending against discrimination allegations. See Pittman v. Housing Authority of City of South Bend, 695 F. Supp. 2d 866 (N.D. Ind. 2010) (granting summary judgment to Defendant on allegations of racial discrimination and retaliation).

Between 2013 and 2018, Brisco worked as Corporation Counsel for the City of South Bend, Indiana. During that time, Brisco authored a letter declining to have the City Attorney’s Office represent Councilmember Henry Davis against a libel suit brought by police officers that Davis had alleged that made racist remarks. See Tom Perkins, ‘Look at His Record’: Buttigieg Faces New Criticism From His City’s Black Leaders, The Guardian, Sept. 26, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/25/pete-buttigieg-south-bend-lawsuit-police-shooting. Brisco also joined an amicus brief on behalf of the City of South Bend in a challenge to President Trump’s “Muslim travel ban.” See Intern. Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 857 F.3d 554 (4th Cir. 2017).

Political Activity

Brisco has a limited political history, which consists of donations to Indiana Democrats Joseph Donnelly and Mel Hall.

Jurisprudence

From 2018 to 2021, Brisco served as a magistrate judge on the Circuit Court for St. Joseph County. As a magistrate judge, Brisco was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court to a Study Commission on the Future of the Indiana Bar Exam. See In re Order Creating a Study Commission on the Future of the Indiana Bar Examination (Ind. 2018).

Since her appointment in 2021, Brisco has served on the St. Joseph County Superior Court, which serves as a trial court of general jurisdiction. Notably, Brisco granted summary judgment against most of the claims alleged by plaintiffs claiming injuries from use of the defendants’ swimming pool. See Pennington v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, 206 N.E.3d 473 (Ind. App. 2023). Brisco’s decision was affirmed by the Indiana Court of Appeals. See id. Additionally, as a Superior Court Judge, Brisco was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court to serve on the Indiana Commission on Equity and Access in the Court System. See In re Order Establishing the Indiana Commission on Equity and Access in the Court System, (Ind. 2021).

Overall Assessment

Brisco’s nomination, paired with that of Elkhart County Judge Gretchen Lund, is the Democratic half of the deal struck with Indiana Senators. That being said, while Brisco’s background does suggest some areas of progressive advocacy, it also shows a mainstream legal philosophy (one that led a Republican Governor to tap her for the bench). Overall, as long as Brisco maintains the support of her home state senators, she should be confirmed comfortably.

139 CommentsLeave a comment

Nicole Berner – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

After an extensive dispute over picking a candidate for the Fourth Circuit, the Biden Administration and Maryland senators have agreed on longtime labor lawyer Nicole Berner.

Background

Born in England, Nicole G. Berner grew up in California before getting a B.A. from U.C. Berkeley in 1988 and a J.D. from Berkeley School of Law and a M.P.P. from the Goldman School of Public Policy at Berkeley in 1995.

After graduating, Berner clerked for Judge Betty Binns Fletcher on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and for Judge Thelton Henderson on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Berner subsequently joined Jenner & Block as an Associate.

In 2004, Berner joined Planned Parenthood as a staff attorney. In 2006, she shifted to the Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”) as in-house counsel, becoming general counsel in 2017. She serves in this role.

History of the Seat

Berner has been nominated to replace U.S. Circuit Judge Diana Gribbon Motz, who moved to senior status on September 30, 2022. Berner’s nomination came almost two years after Motz first announced her departure, a delay that was allegedly attributed to a dispute in candidates between the White House and Sen. Ben Cardin. However, Cardin and Sen. Chris Van Hollen have both indicated their support for Berner.

Legal Experience

Other than her clerkships, Berner started her legal career at the firm of Jenner & Block. Notably, Berner was part of the legal team representing Michael Schiavo in the suit to permit him to end nutrition and hydration for his wife Terri Schiavo. See Bush v. Schiavo, 871 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 2d Dist. App. 2004). While at the firm, Berner was part of the legal team representing amici in a suit challenging Arkansas’ sodomy ban. See Jegley v. Picado, 80 S.W.3d 332 (Ark. 2002). Berner was also representing amici as part of a suit to strike down Kansas’ Romeo-and-Juliet law for distinguishing legal penalties based on whether couples were of the opposite sex or the same sex. See State v. Limon, 280 Kan. 275 (2005).

After her time at Jenner & Block, Berner spent two years at Planned Parenthood. While there, Berner was part of the legal team challenging Ohio’s ban on the drug mifepristone. See Planned Parenthood Cincinnati v. Taft, 444 F.3d 502 (6th Cir. 2006).

Since 2006, Berner has been in-house counsel for the union SEIU. In this role, Berner litigated across the country in cases where employers were accused of retaliating against union organizers or breaching union agreements. See, e.g., Finley Hosp. v. NLRB, 827 F.3d 720 (8th Cir. 2016). Berner has also served as counsel in litigation where SEIU has been sued for alleged violations. See, e.g., Bellitto v. Snipes, 221 F. Supp. 3d 1354 (S.D. Fla. 2016). During the Trump Administration, Berner was part of SEIU legal challenges to Trump executive orders governing union activities by government employees. See Service Employees Intern. Union Local 200 v. Trump, 419 F. Supp. 3d 612 (W.D.N.Y. 2019).

Additionally, Berner has served as amici counsel for unions in a number of different cases, including cases of marriage equality. See Windsor v. United States, 699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012). Berner also represented amici in Hawaii’s suit against the Trump travel ban. See Hawaii v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2017). More recently, Berner has represented amici in a challenge to abortion restrictions in Missouri. See Reproductive Health Servs. v. Parson, 1 F.4th 552 (8th Cir. 2021).

Writings and Media

Berner has written and commented frequently on the law, including the intersection of the law and LGBT issues. See, e.g., Nicole Berner, Child Custody Disputes Between Lesbians: Legal Strategies and Their Limitations, 10 Berkeley Women’s L.J. 31, 32 (1995). Berner has also written on the challenges of being a female attorney. See Stephanie A. Scharf, Lorelei S. Masters, Nicole G. Berner, and Cynthia J. Robertson, Through the Glass Ceiling: Best Practices for Women Lawyers and Their Firms, 89 Women Law J. 7 (2003-2004).

In 2000, Berner was a plaintiff in Berner-Kadish v. Minister of Interior, a landmark Israeli Supreme Court case that recognized the rights of two mothers to be designated on a child’s birth certificate. The case, and subsequent legal support for same-sex parents in Israel, also led to media attention and profiles of Berner and her family. See, e.g., Meet the Berner-Kadish Family, New Israel Fund, June 11, 2015, available at https://www.nif.org/stories/human-rights-democracy/meet-the-berner-kadish-family/.

Political Activity

Berner has been a frequent donor to Democrats across the country, for example, donating to Sen. Elizabeth Warren in 2020. Berner has also given to unsuccessful senate candidates Cal Cunningham and Theresa Greenfield.

Overall Assessment

Berner comes to the federal bench with extensive litigation experience. Additionally, her work as a labor attorney and an attorney on LGBT and reproductive rights issues is likely to endear her to the left. However, those same qualifications are likely to attract strong opposition from conservatives. Additionally, conservatives may look askance at Berner’s wife’s representation of Christine Blasey Ford, who had accused Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault.

All in all, Berner is likely to be deemed a controversial nomination. If confirmed, Berner is likely to reinforce the liberal wing of the Fourth Circuit.

101 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Amy Baggio – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon

Longtime public defender turned judge Amy Baggio is President Biden’s third nominee for the federal trial court in Oregon.

Background

Baggio received a B.A. cum laude from Wake Forest University in 1995 and a J.D. from Lewis & Clark Law School in 2001. After spending a year at the Portland Metropolitan Public Defender, Baggio joined the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the District of Oregon, starting as a research and writing attorney and then shifting to be a Assistant Federal Public Defender in 2005.

In 2013, Baggio left to start her own law practice. In 2019, Governor Kate Brown appointed Baggio to the Multnomah County Circuit Court.

History of the Seat

Baggio has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. This seat will open on August 21, 2024, when Judge Marco Hernandez moves to senior status. Baggio was among six candidates recommended to the White House by Oregon Senators in June 2023.

Legal Experience

Starting her career as a public defender at the state level, Baggio spent ten years at the Federal Public Defender’s Office. Among the cases she handled there, Baggio argued before the Ninth Circuit unsuccessfully that the crime of receiving child pornograpy includes an intent to distribute. See United States v. Olander, 572 F.3d 764 (9th Cir. 2009). Baggio also represented detainees at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay. See Gul v. Obama, 652 F.3d 12 (D.C. 2011). In addition, Baggio joined an amicus brief on behalf of the detainees in constitutional challenges to their detention. See Boumedine v. Bush, 476 F.3d 981 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

Between 2013 and 2019, Baggio served as a solo practitioner in Portland. During this time, Baggio represented co-defendants in the prosecution of Ammon Bundy after the 2016 occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. See United States v. Bundy, 195 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (D. Ore. 2016).

Jurisprudence

Baggio has served as a Circuit Court Judge since 2019. In this role, she serves as a primary trial judge, supervising criminal and civil cases. In a notable decision later affirmed by the Oregon Court of Appeals, Baggio denied a motion to suppress, finding that exigent circumstances prompted by ongoing animal neglect justified officers.entering the defendant’s residence to seize her cat. See State v. Hsieh, 499 P.3d 142 (Or. App. 2021). In another notable decision, Baggio granted a writ of habeas corpus releasing a prisoner due to inadequate measures used to treat Covid-19 in the facility, which the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed. See Lawson v. Cain, 524 P.3d 529 (Or. App. 2023).

Political Activity

Baggio has a limited donation history, consisting of a single donation to President Obama’s campaign in 2008.

Overall Assessment

Like many of Biden’s nominees, Baggio has extensive experience in indigent defense, ranging from the representation of detainees to those of right-wing militants in Oregon. Baggio’s history is likely to cause significant opposition through the confirmation process, although Baggio is still favored to be confirmed before the vacancy is expected to open.

200 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Jacqueline Becerra – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida

A prominent South Florida attorney turned U.S. Magistrate Judge, Judge Jackie Becerra rounds out three nominations made by the Biden Administration to fill vacancies on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Background

Born in Miami Beach in 1970, Jacqueline Becerra graduated from the University of Miami in 1991 and then from Yale Law School in 1994. Becerra then joined the U.S. Department of Justice, working in the Civil Division and then the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. In 1999, Becerra shifted to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida.

In 2004, Becerra became a Shareholder at Greenberg Traurig P.A. in Miami. In 2019, she was appointed to be a U.S. Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Florida, where she currently serves.

History of the Seat

Becerra has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. This seat opened on July 15, 2022, when Judge Marcia Cooke moved to senior status.

Legal Career

Becerra started her legal career at the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, where she stayed for three years, working on civil defense in litigation across the United States.

Between 1997 and 2004, Becerra worked as a federal prosecutor, first in D.C. and then with the U.S. Attorney’s for the Southern District of Florida. Notably, Becerra prosecuted four Miami police officers for excessive force in their beating of an individual under arrest. See United States v. Aguero, No. 1:02-cr-20174-ALTONAGA (S.D. Fla. 2002). This case ended in a voluntary dismissal by the government due to a change in the victim testimony at trial.

Between 2004 and 2019, Becerra worked at Greenberg Traurig in Miami. In this role, Becerra primarily worked on commercial litigation matters as well as regulatory compliance. Notably, Becerra represented Miami-based Tiger Direct in a suit against Apple Computer over an advertising campaign that referenced Tiger. See Tiger Direct Inc. v. Apple Computer, Inc., No. 1:05-cv-21136-LENARD (S.D. Fla. 2005).

Jurisprudence

Since 2019, Becerra has served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. In this role, Becerra presides over cases by agreement, writes reports and recommendations for district judges, and handles pretrial motions, discovery disputes, and bail matters. During her tenure, Becerra has presided over four trials.

Among the notable cases where parties consented to her jurisdiction, Becerra denied a motion to compel arbitration brought by defendants in a trademark infringement action, finding that the plaintiffs were not signatories to the arbitration clause signed by their affiliates. See Taylor Grp., Inc. v. Indus. Distribs. Int’l Co., 522 F. Supp. 3d 1212 (S.D. Fla. 2021), aff’d, 859 F. App’x 439 (11th Cir. 2021). Becerra’s decision was subsequently affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit.

Political Activity

Before she became a judge, Becerra had an extensive political donation history, all to Democrats, including multiple donations to President Obama and to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Overall Assessment

While arguably the most “liberal” of the three South Florida nominees put forward by the Biden Administration, Becerra is still likely to fit within the mainstream of judges on the Southern District of Florida. While she would likely draw more opposition than her co-nominees, Becerra is still likely to be confirmed comfortably.

100 CommentsLeave a comment