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 Comments

  1. Ethan's avatar

    I really hope that Rubio and Scott will agree to a Black woman for the final vacancy. If they can’t agree on Detra Shaw-Wilder (born c. 1969), I’m not sure they’d agree to anyone. She’s based in Fort Lauderdale with the vacancy being in Miami. @Dequan, since you know that area well, I don’t know exactly how far apart they are and if that would matter.

    Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s commission recommended Ayanna Harris (born c. 1980), a state judge and former federal defender, as well as Shaniek Maynard (born c. 1976), a Magistrate Judge and former AUSA.

    No way they’d agree to Harris and even Maynard is probably too young for them.

    Liked by 1 person

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      @Ethan

      The key was to get the fourth vacancy filled along with Liebowitz, who Rubio would have probably given his right are to get nominated. Now I’m less confident the seat will get filled before Biden’s first term ends.

      My guess is Rubio probably sign off on somebody like the U.S. Attorney (If not him exactly) for the fourth seat but when Ben Crump & others pushed hard for a Black woman, Biden probably pumped the brakes on that deal. Not wanting to tank the rest of the deal, they probably just agreed to announce the other 3 plus Sneed to get those seats filled. Now we will have to wish for Rubio & Scott’s good will for the final SDFL spot & we all know how I feel about my two home state senators & their good faith…smh

      Like

  3. keystone's avatar

    Happy birthday, Judge Michael Simon (D-Ore). He is one step closer to being eligible for senior status – he’ll reach that milestone in June.

    Should he announce, I suspect we’d get a nomination pretty quickly since Senators Wyden and Merkley already made a judge recommendation list earlier this year.
    https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2023/06/names-of-6-finalists-forwarded-to-white-house-for-upcoming-federal-court-vacancy-in-oregon.html

    Fun fact – Judge Simon’s uncle was the playwright Neil Simon.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Frank's avatar

    Becerra seems to be a well qualified judicial nominee based on her prior background. One thing not noted in the article of interest is that Bererra was briefly (from 2009 to 2010) a member of the ACS, as she was asked about during her hearing earlier this week. Nevertheless, I agree with Harsh that she should be confirmed with few issues.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Zack's avatar

    Bush V Gore.
    That is Sandra Day O’Connor’s legacy to me, as well as timing her retirement knowing someone horrible like Alito was going to be her replacement.
    She broke barriers but she was no hero and I don’t feel sad about her passing at all.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. Gavi's avatar

    @Jill
    “I always respected the fact that SDO knew when it was time to retire…”

    This is revisionist history.
    Sandra Day O’Connor didn’t retire because she knew it was time. She retired explicitly to care for her ailing husband, who pre-deceased her shortly thereafter.
    A few years after her husband died, she expressed regret with the decision to leave because she didn’t want to and only did so to take on the role of a caregiver. This was one of the things RBG referenced in her own refusal to retire.

    Not to mention that O’Connor would not have retired if John Kerry had won in 2004. It’s well documented that she was pissed (and injudiciously voiced this frustration) when news reports mistakenly started to call the election for Kerry.

    One last point, the Bush WH and some in the conservative legal movement were nervous that O’Connor would withdraw her retirement in the face of Harriet Miers’ nomination withdrawal and the replacement of Sam Alito as the nominee: another non-federal appellate judge female for a male circuit court judge. I wish she had.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Gavi's avatar

        @Dequan,
        Nope, it was Kerry. This was 2004 we’re talking about. She wanted Bush to be reelected so that she would retire. She didn’t know that Bush would nominate such rightwing SCOTUS justices. Arlen Specter and Patrick Leahy were lobbying for another non-circuit court judge to be nominated if there was a SCOTUS vacancy.

        Remember, she was a Republican who wanted her fellow partisan to win. She just failed to anticipate how extreme the nominees of that Republican presidency would be.
        She should have known! Bush didn’t start nominating extreme conservative judges in 2005!

        Like

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        Oh ok. It’s also well documented that she was pissed (Apparently she was verbally angry at a party she was at) when news reports mistakenly started to call the election for Gore. So I thought you got mixed up with that.

        Now the one thing I’m confused on is why were they fearful she would withdraw her retirement if a non federal judge or a nominee too conservative was nominated. Remember prior to Chief Justice Rehnquist dying, Bush nominated John Roberts to O’Connors seat. She gave no indication she would withdraw when a White man on the DC circuit was nominated to replace her.

        Like

      • Gavi's avatar

        I am the one who’s confused the dates, sorry! Yes, it was the 2000. One could argue that her vote in Bush v. Gore is the logical extension of that frustration.
        The fear wasn’t about Roberts. It was during the Miers debacle. They worried that she would feel like Miers, whose profile was similar to hers, was treated unfairly resulting in the withdrawal of that nomination. There’s been talk since 2001 that O’Connor was the likely justice to retire, so some senators wanted a like for like replacement. Obviously, John Roberts was the opposite of that. But then Miers came tantalizingly close to making that happen before being snatched away.

        Liked by 1 person

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        @Gavi

        Ooohhh ok. I was thinking to myself how could I have missed that story regarding had Kerry been elected when I was more interested in politics in 2004 than I was in 2000 when I heard the story about how mad she was when she thought Gore won. But then I said to myself if anybody would know it would be you so I said I must of just missed it… Lol

        Anyway a simply mistake off by 4 years. We will chalk it up to your over excitement of Ramirez getting confirmed Monday. I’m sure your non stop partying must have gotten your dates mixed up… Haaaaaa

        Oh & while I have you, another day, another Word Press glitch. Now when I hit Reply to comment, it goes to another screen where I have to confirm the comment… Uuuggghhh… I’d almost trade another Ramirez for the 1st or 6th if Harsh switches the blog from Word Press… Lmao

        Like

  11. JMoore's avatar

    I am thankful for all the information this site and the comments give. I am not a lawyer but I find this subject interesting.

    I just finished the “Barchester Towers” by Anthony Trollope (written in 1857). There are several clerical appointments being fought over in the novel (Bishop, Dean and Warden). The tools for the fight are the same as a modern judicial appointment. Ther are ideological factions (high and low Anglican). The aspirants lobby government officials, get recommendations from friends and try to get the press on their side. Even money had a role in the factional fighting (the high church faction was more popular with the merchants due to their higher spending).

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Zack's avatar

    If Sandra Day O’Connor didn’t want a far more conservative justice replacing her, she wouldn’t have voted the way she did in Bush V Gore.
    There is also no way that she didn’t know whomever replaced her was likely to be to her right of her.
    Folks just want to give her a benefit of the doubt because of the barriers she broke and because other jurists since her have proven to be worse.

    Liked by 2 people

    • keystone's avatar

      Politics were so different in 2000, as were the political parties. The way GWB sold himself to the public ended up being very different from the GWB who became president.

      I agree that she wanted to be replaced by a judge with a right-centered ideology. I don’t think she was expecting someone so far right-wing… or (as we later learned, corrupt).

      Her legacy is complicated, due largely to the way she exited her term. I think the same could be said for Justice Kennedy and also RBG.

      At the end of the day, I think she generally a fair and reasonable judge and I would happily accept a red state nominee who resembles her vs the FedSoc hacks we get now.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. Joe's avatar

    O’Connor seems like a fine woman and I certainly send my condolences to her family.

    Regarding Supreme Court Justices, the only thing that frustrates me more than their feigned innocence at the future direction of the court is the reporters who pretend to believe them and continue to give credence to the idea that they have no agency.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Hank's avatar

      This was a rare CA5 panel with 2 Dem appointees (the opinion was written by Biden appointee Douglas), and the Trump judge dissented. It’s almost certainly going to be reheard en banc, and the en banc opinion (or a concurrence) will have plenty of unhinged rantings by Ho/Oldham/Elrod/etc. (not to mention the requisite racism by that old crone Jones).

      Like

  17. Ethan's avatar

    So just out of curiosity, I decided to figure who the next Chief Judge of each circuit will be and in what year:

    – 1st Circuit: Gustavo Gelpi (he’ll be 64 in 2029 when Barron’s term is up)

    – 2nd Circuit: Raymond Lohier (he’ll be 64 in 2029 when Barron’s term is up)

    – 3rd Circuit: Thomas Hardiman (he’ll be 63 in 2028 when Chagares’s term is up)

    – 4th Circuit: Julius Richardson (he’ll be 54 in 2030 when Diaz’s term is up) *Stephanie Thacker turns 65 in 2030 so I think that disqualifies her.

    – 5th Circuit: Jennifer Walker Elrod (she’ll be 60 in 2026 when Richman’s term is up)

    – 6th Circuit: Raymond Kethledge (he’ll be 62 in 2028 when Sutton’s term is up)

    – 7th Circuit: Michael Brennan (he’ll be 64 in 2027 when Sykes’s term is up)

    – 8th Circuit: Steven Colloton (he’ll be 61 in 2024 when Smith’s term is up)

    – 9th Circuit: Jacqueline Nguyen (she’ll be 63 in 2028 when Murguia’s term is up)

    – 10th Circuit: Allison Eid (she’ll be 64 in 2029 when Holmes’s term is up)

    – 11th Circuit: Robin Rosenbaum (she’ll be 61 in 2027 when Pryor’s term is up)

    – DC Circuit: Patricia Millett (she’ll be 64 in 2027 when Srinivasan’s term is up)

    – Federal Circuit: Raymond Chen (he’ll be 60 in 2028 when Moore’s term is up).

    Liked by 2 people

    • star0garnet's avatar

      Thacker will be 64 at the end of Diaz’s term. Otherwise correct apart from repeating Barron for the 2nd (Livingston’s expires in 2027) and Richman’s expires in 2024.

      There are five currently eligible judges ahead of the heirs apparent who could land it under particular circumstances. They lose their eligibility:

      9th: Morgan Christen in December 2026 (Murguia is senior-eligible in September 2025)

      10th: Robert Bacharach in May 2024

      10th: Gregory Phillips in August 2025

      10th: Nancy Moritz in March 2025, although she’d also need Phillips to pass on it

      11th: Adalberto Jordan in December 2026

      Having the 10th pass from Tymkovich (2015-2022) to Holmes (2022-2029) to Eid (2029-2035) to Carson (2035-2041) would be a frustrating when an alternative timeline could include Moritz (2025-2030), Carson (2030-2037), and Rossman (2037-2042).

      Liked by 1 person

  19. raylodato's avatar

    Tried to post this yesterday, but don’t see it here.

    Starting on Monday, December will see four vacancies ripen:

    Edwards-Honeywell (MDFL)–12/4
    Aiken (OR)–12/15 (unless Kasubahi is confirmed before then)
    Durkin (NDIL)–12/26
    Davis (MDFL)–12/30

    In January & on February 1, we get another 3:
    Fallon (EDLA)–1/1
    Mannion (MDPA)–1/3
    Howell (DC)–2/1

    It would be great if Schumer would clear the existing calendar (and add the OK nominees for good measure), but I wonder if the Rs will retaliate for Thursday’s SJC meeting and deny all UCs. (Seems unlikely Kennedy would retailate against the LA nominees, but hey, this is the Senate, and they do strange as standard practice).

    As I mentioned before, I think Obama had only 20-21 vacancies in January 2015 due to Reid’s vote-a-palooza (thanks, Ted Cruz!), and while there aren’t enough nominees on the floor to get us there by next month, it would be good to get under 50 current vacancies by then. But I imagine that even without full on retaliation, Rs will insist on the full 2 hours for Bjelkengren, Kasubahi, Russell, and a few others.

    Like

    • keystone's avatar

      Hmmm. The birth year she listed on her Senate confirmation questionnaire in 1964. That would put her at 59/60 on that date. So she’d still be under the 65 threshold. I wonder if she got an exemption to be able to go senior early. Maybe a health issue.

      Speaking of Minnesota, I found a picture from Friday of Chief Justice Patrick J. Schiltz administering the oath of office to Jeffrey Bryan. The woman next to him is his wife, Liz Kramer, who is the MN Solicitor General. Her name has also been floated at times for elevation to the Federal Courts.

      https://twitter.com/short_pants/status/1730696034886488190/photo/1

      Liked by 1 person

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        @keystone

        I thought disability at first too, but I don’t believe you can go senior status if you’re disabled. I could be wrong but I think you have to outright retire. If I’m wrong then that would have to be the only explanation, I can think of because to your point, she is nowhere near, let alone at 65 next year.

        As for Liz Kramer, she absolutely could be a federal judge herself. I wouldn’t object to that husband/wife duo at all. I don’t know if Biden would do it, although the Wright vacancy could be tempting for him to make history & do it. But there should be no shortage of good possibilities for Minnesota.

        Liked by 1 person

      • dequanhargrove's avatar

        Ok good to know. That’s the only explanation I can think of so perhaps she had a disability & it just hasn’t been reported. She certainly is t going to be 65 next year which is one of the three requirements to take senior status otherwise.

        Like

  21. Daisyoodle's avatar

    Looking through the latest batch of district court nominees has brought me to the conclusion that Judge Baggio is going to be vehemently opposed by Republicans. Serving as a public defender, she defended a terrorist (which is her job), and as a judge, she released a petty criminal who went on to kill two people. Be prepared for bad-faith attacks.

    Like

  22. keystone's avatar

    In case anyone is interested, I pulled together a list of what we know about some of the current openings.

    Process usually involves collecting applications, Committee interviews, Senator interviews, WH interviews, Background check, Nomination announcement.

    ***************************
    Rhode Island -Review Committee Application Deadline was July 28.

    Virginia (WDVA) – Review Committee Application Deadline was Aug 14. Senators have interviewed candidates and sent a list of noms to WH on Nov 16.

    Illinois (NDIL) -Review Committee Application Deadline was Sept 11. Senators have interviewed candidates and sent a list of noms to WH on Nov 17. This is a new list of candidates.

    DC (D.D.C.)-Congresswoman Norton’s Review Committee Application Deadline was Sept 26.

    Arizona (3 seats) -Review Committee Application Deadline was Oct 26.

    Maryland -Review Committee Application Deadline was Nov 13.

    Pennsylvania (2 EDPA and 1 MDPA) -Review Committee Application Deadline was Nov 27.

    Vermont -Review Committee Application Deadline was Dec 01.

    Ohio (SDOH and NDOH) -Senator Brown’s Review Committee Application Deadline was Dec 01.

    ***************************
    Upcoming deadlines

    Mass – Dec 11

    Maine (both Circuit Court and district) – Dec 15

    Minnesota – TBD

    ***************************
    Unknowns

    Illinois (CDIL) – Review Committee had a Deadline of 5/23. However, the Illinois Senators usually release a list of candidates and we haven’t seen one yet, so not sure of the current status.

    California, New York, and Michigan all have seats but aren’t as forthcoming with information about their current candidate processes.

    Liked by 4 people

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      @Keystone

      Thanks for the list. Schumer usually announces who he recommends. I know for Garnett he announced but it was reported on Law360 which I don’t have a subscription for so if anybody does & he announces, please share. California doesn’t announce but I’m hoping with Padilla now the senior senator, hopefully they have a single commission. Michigan never announced ahead of time sadly.

      @Gavi

      All true about public defenders. I too like when public defenders are nominated to give a different perspective on the bench.

      Like

  23. Gavi's avatar

    I’m glad we’re discussing public defenders. I don’t understand why a lot of folks on here assume that having public defender job on the resume means that the person is liberal. That’s not the case. Personally, I like when public defenders get nominated to judgeships, not because I think they’ll be liberal, but as a counterbalance to the overrepresentation of former prosecutors and corporate lawyers on the bench.
    Take, for example, Matthew Wright. He is a public defender who recently defended Zackey Rahimi in United States v. Rahimi. The very short version is Rahimi is a very bad man who is trying to evade justice by twisting 2nd Amendment jurisprudence even more, with the help of a federal public defender.

    Speaking of which, senate Republicans may go after Judge Baggio for her past legal advocacy in the FPD’s office. Matthew Wright may very well lose this case (which looks more likely) but don’t be shocked if in a Republican Admin, Republicans support him for a judgeship in Texas. Even though he defended a hardened gun criminal and tried to use the law to overturn gun restrictions on domestic abusers. They are hypocritical like that.

    (Fun fact: public defenders are not DOJ employees. They are actually Article III branch officers.)

    Liked by 4 people

    • shawnee68's avatar

      There are more prosecutors nominated because there are MORE of them by far. When judges get sued they get represented by DOJ.

      Almost all of the criminal defense lawyers you will see especially on TV were prosecutors. Their perspective is very valuable when defending clients. They know how prosecutors think.

      Like

      • Aiden's avatar

        I think their are more prosecutors, yes for the reasons you mentioned.
        But also because governments often chronically underfunds public defenders offices or give them comparatively and substantially less.
        Examples of low public defender amounts is oregan but its widespread.

        The overrepresention of prosecutors is not because there Is more of them, but because their appointments fall in line with the traiditional hard on crime approach.
        Coporate lawyers and prosecutors being overrepresented is a serious issue for the justice system
        To look at the law hollistically and from different perspectives, requires a variety of appointments. Which was not seen especially at the appellate level before biden, and isnt seen on many state supreme courts.
        Even blue states like connecitcut.

        Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        I don’t there such a thing as a well funded public defenders office. They get stacks of cases and can’t do good work.

        I know the Assistant US Attorney’s have an FBI agent assigned to them. When it’s the US Attorney him or herself they get another attorney and a FBI agent.

        It’s not gonna change anytime soon.

        Like

  24. tsb1991's avatar

    As far as the Senate schedule this week is concerned, apparently the talks over the Ukraine/Israel funding broke down over border security over the weekend. They may still file cloture for a bill that Republicans would block, but we’ll see if any additional cloture motions for nominees are sent to the desk this week, since there’s no apparent starting point for this bill.

    Only two cloture motions were sent on Friday, one for AliKhan and one for a counterterrorism nominee. The only vote being held today is the confirmation of Ramirez (surprised a cloture vote wasn’t also added to today), but the four votes for confirmation/cloture on the two nominees should be tomorrow. Currently Wednesday would be open, so I’d be on the lookout for any cloture filings today. At this point, the remaining district nominees are either the red state or the party line nominees. Maybe we get cloture filed on some party line nominees if Schumer knows he’ll have full Democratic attendance this week?

    Also, if no vote is set for any bill this week due to talks breaking down, that could tee up a cloture vote for Federico or Kolar on Thursday. Minus the red state district court nominees, those two would actually be the easiest to confirm from here on out.

    Liked by 2 people

    • dequanhargrove's avatar

      I think the most likely chance for cloture motions are the remining blue state district court nominees. Schumer seems to trying to set on leaving red state nominees for a possible vote-a-rama at the end of the year or renomination by Biden in January. I can see cloture motions for either Kolar or Federico sent tomorrow to set up cloture vote for Thursday & confirmation Monday.

      Like

      • keystone's avatar

        If Schumer feels good about his chances of getting AliKhan confirmed this week, I think he should also be able to get Kiel through. Kiel would probably have had some crossover support except for the fact that he had the misfortune of having his hearing so soon after the mideast attacks and the committee freaked out over a statement made by a group that Kiel belonged to decades ago. (eye roll)

        I’ve heard the Republican members of the Judicial committee recently name check Bjelkengren, Gaston, and Edelman. They’re still freaking out over those 3 in particular. Their confirmation is gonna be tight.

        Nobody ever mentions Kato Crews. I think the Dems could maybe get him through. I think the lack of outrage would make it easier for Manchin to vote yes.

        For Mehalchick, I think Machin will support her due largely to the fact that he and Senator Casey have such a strong working relationship. Friendships can go a long way for votes (see Romney and Roopali Desai).

        Kasubhai, Lee, and S. Russell will also prob be tight votes.

        Worst case scenario for the International Trade Judges is that they vote through Lisa Wang (the dem nom) and then the Senate will agree to voice vote Laroski (the Rep nom) just to even out the balance on that court.

        My two cents.

        Like

  25. Mitch's avatar

    I’m going to return to the fourth vacancy on the Southern District of Florida. Marco Rubio really hit it off with Markenzy Lapointe, who at the time was General Counsel at Pillsbury, and Rick Scott deferred to Rubio. While negotiations were ongoing, Lapointe was appointed U.S. Attorney for the same district. I think that the White House was OK with the pick until Ben Crump insisted that one of the four nominees be a black woman. But Rubio is sticking to his guns and perhaps feels betrayed.

    Lapointe is a solid choice, well-qualified and I think would be the first Haitian-American to serve as a Federal judge. I’m not aware of anything in his background that would raise questions.

    If the vacancy is filled by a black woman, it’ll likely be Detra Shaw-Wilder, a business acquisitions lawyer. Shaw-Wilder is considered a safe choice.

    Here’s something no one else seems to have noticed. The Southern District of Florida has a number of elderly judges. It’s likely that there will be another vacancy on the court before the 2024 elections.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Joe's avatar

    If I was a betting man I would put my money on the FL senators not signing off on any more judges until after the 2024 elections. I could be way off on that. But getting 4 from them is more than I would have anticipated already and perhaps they feel like they’ve “done enough” and want to hold the remaining seats for a more friendly administration.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Joe's avatar

    Thanks for sharing Gavi. I certainly do think Schumer should threaten to keep the senate in session another week to clear up the backlog of district nominees at least. Perhaps he’ll try to since there are no urgent spending bills like last year. We will see.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Ryan J's avatar

    It’s wild that every senior-eligible district judge in Illinois has either taken senior status or plans on doing so within the next year, especially given that Illinois is a pretty big state. Although all of Illinois’s district judges who could go senior have or will done so, there are still 2 Illinois judges on the 7th circuit eligible to go senior and choosing not to: Ilana Rovner and Frank Easterbrook.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. Joe's avatar

    I don’t believe we’ll see 80 votes for a Democrat circuit court again.

    I know many here did not care for the nomination. While we don’t know what kind of a judge she’ll be, I do agree that I would’ve preferred someone 5-10 years younger. Nevertheless, glad she’s been confirmed and we’ll go into the new year that much closer to confirming every possible circuit court judge

    Liked by 2 people

  33. raylodato's avatar

    Looks like we’ll max out at 40-41 this session. Getting to 54 by November 2024 seems unlikely.

    Can’t believe Schumer didn’t schedule AliKhan’s confirmation vote for tomorrow afternoon. I’m starting to worry about whether we’ll get a vote-a-rama next week.

    Like

    • tsb1991's avatar

      She should be confirmed tomorrow, two of the Senate feed Twitter accounts (Senate Periodicals and Senate Press Gallery) both have the disclaimer “Additional votes are expected” under the schedules they posted for tomorrow. Her confirmation vote will probably be around 2:30PM, after the weekly caucus lunches. There should also be at least a cloture vote on that counterterrorism coordinator nominee afterwards as well.

      Like

  35. tsb1991's avatar

    I think Manchin voted no on AliKhan. He was one of the first votes since he was giving a floor speech right before the vote, I think I saw a thumbs down, it was hard to tell since the graphic on C-SPAN was in the way, lol.

    Like

  36. Pingback: Detra Shaw-Wilder – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida | The Vetting Room

  37. Pingback: Judge Jacqueline Becerra – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida – The Pursuits of Porsha

Leave a comment