Sparkle Sooknanan – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Department of Justice attorney Sparkle Sooknanan is the White House’s second nominee to replace Judge Florence Pan on the D.C. District Court.

Background

A native of Trinidad & Tobago, Sooknanan moved to New York City at age 16 to attend St. Francis College, graduating summa cum laude in 2002. Sooknanan subsequently got an M.B.A. with Distinction from Hofstra College in 2003 and then started work at HIP Health Plan. Sooknanan continued working there while studying in the evenings at Brooklyn Law School, getting a J.D. summa cum laude in 2010.

After graduating, Sooknanan clerked for Judge Eric Vitaliano on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Judge Guido Calabresi on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and then for Justice Sonia Sotomayor on the U.S. Supreme Court. Sooknanan then joined Jones Day, becoming a Partner in 2020. Sookanan subsequently left Jones Day and joined the U.S. Department of Justice, where she currently serves as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division.

History of the Seat

Sooknanan was nominated, based on the recommendation of Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, to replace Judge Florence Pan, who was elevated to the D.C. Circuit on September 28, 2022. President Biden had previously nominated D.C. Superior Judge Todd Edelman to replace Pan, but despite being approved by the Judiciary Committee multiple times, Edelman never received a floor vote and his nomination was not resubmitted to the Senate in 2024.

Legal Experience

Sooknanan started her career in practice with a brief stint at the Department of Justice between her lower court clerkships and her clerkship with Sotomayor. During this time, Sooknanan had the opportunity to argue before the Ninth Circuit on a Federal Tort Claims Act case. See Dichter-Mad Family Partners, LLP v. United States, 709 F.3d 749 (9th Cir. 2013).

Between 2014 and 2020, Sooknanan practiced at the firm Jones Day. At Jones Day, Sooknanan was part of the legal team representing Everytown for Gun Safety as amici in a suit challenging Colorado’s background check laws. See Colorado Outfitters Ass’n v. Hickenlooper, 823 F.3d 537 (10th Cir. 2016). Sooknanan also represented defendants challenging their convictions relating to the illegal smuggling of drugs (now Judge Trevor McFadden was one of the attorneys representing the government on the suit). See United States v. Mosquera-Murillo, 902 F.3d 285 (D.C. Cir. 2018). One of Sooknanan’s most intensive cases from this time was her involvement in a multi-party litigation related to bonds issued by the Employee Retirement System of the Government of Puerto Rico. See In re Financial Oversight & Manage. Bd. of Puerto Rico, 914 F.3d 694 (1st Cir. 2019).

Notably, Sooknanan, alongside fellow former Supreme Court clerks Benjamin Mizer and Parker Rider-Longmaid, filed amicus briefs in support of the City of Charlottesville’s decision to remove Confederate statues. See City of Charlottesville v. Payne, 856 S.E.2d 203 (Va. 2021). The Virginia Supreme Court ultimately reversed a Circuit Court ruling putting the removal on hold. See id. However, due to Jones Day’s challenges to Pennsylvania election accommodations for the pandemic, Sooknanan resigned from Jones Day.

Since 2021, Sooknanan has been with the Department of Justice, most recently working with the Civil Rights Division.

Political Activity

Sooknanan has a limited political history, including donations to Secretary Hillary Clinton and Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul.

Overall Assessment

While Sooknanan doesn’t have experience as a public defender as Edelman did, her nomination is likely to prove fairly controversial as well. Her resignation of Jones Day and her work at the Civil Rights Division is likely to draw strong conservative opposition. With an election approaching, it remains to be seen if Sooknanan will be muscled through while Democrats have the attendance to do so.

928 Comments

    • Dequan's avatar

      Great day for the judiciary today. Biden made us sweat for it, but it seems to have been worth the wait. Here are my thoughts;

      Kevin Ritz – This is the 8th time I’ve guessed a circuit court pick correctly (I don’t count Childs since I guessed her for the 4th). This is a really good pick for several reasons. There should be no issues with Gibbons rescinding with this pick. He should be a reliable vote alongside Andre Mathis.

      The best part about this pick is they didn’t announce the other 6th pick. That was simply a BRILLANT move. Now they can move Ritz along while being able to play hardball with Blackburn & Haggerty for the other vacancy. It’s still March so even if they confirm Ritz by early June, they could announce a more liberal nominee for the other seat by mid-June if the home staet senators are not negotiating in good faith & still get them confirmed sometime around the election. Really good job here by the WHC office. I am going to give Ritz a grade of A- because of him as well as the situation surrounding the seat. If I was just grading him straight up, I would probably go with a B- but this was played perfectly by the WH & I have to go higher with everything included.

      Brian E. Murphy (c. 1980) – A young former public defender at the Committee for Public Counsel Services is straight out of central casting for what I’m looking for in judicial nominees… A (With the potential for an A+ after I look more into his cases).

      Rebecca L. Pennell (c. 1971) – I was familiar with her already. She is a good pick with her federal defender background for a decade & a half. I am a little disappointed they were not able to find another Black woman but unfortunately the last nominee I would have voted against if I was in the senate, so they tried. I wish they could have found a nominee that mirrored the ages of some of the WDWA judges but all in all this is a good pick… A-

      Detra Shaw-Wilder (c. 1968) – We have spoken about her at length, so I won’t rehash everything said. This was the number one seed similar to Ritz from the beginning as I believe she was only one of two attorneys on both Rubio’s & Wasserman-Schultz list of recommendations. It’s a wonder she wasn’t announced with the other batch of SDFL nominees last year. Perhaps Rubio & Scott refused to turn in blue slips for her & the WH threatened to nominate her to the 11th which would be brilliant if so. Either way I’m happy to finally see her nominated & to see the SDFL should soon have a Black woman on the court again… A

      Jeannette Vargas (c. 1973) – Nothing at all progressive in her background from what I can see. This is another safe (AKA bland) pick who is in her 50’s… C+

      Liked by 3 people

  7. rcpekp's avatar

    Full announcement is out:

    Kevin Ritz (6th Cir.)

    Brian E. Murphy (D. Mass.)

    Rebecca L. Pennell (E.D. Wash.)

    Detra Shaw-Wilder (S.D. Fla.)

    Jeannette Vargas (S.D.N.Y.)

    Plus two nominees for the D.C. Superior Court and U.S. Marshal for E.D. Ky.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Hank's avatar

    Glad to finally see the CA6 nominee – as we all suspected, it was Ritz. Has anybody seen if Blackburn signed off or if she’s going to claim the US Attorney she supported just two years ago is somehow weak on crime?

    Also, is this the second US Attorney to be nominated directly to a circuit seat? I remember Chung was to CA3, but not sure if there have been any others.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Zack's avatar

    We have nominees, including one to the 6th Circuit.
    Going to be whom a lot of people had picked, Kevin Ritz, whom clerked for Gibbons.
    While he won’t be making people jump up for joy like Berner would, Gibbons will be happy with him and that is what counts here.
    We also have nominees for the SDFL,SDNY, MA and Rebecca L. Pennell for the EDWA to replace Charnelle Bjelkengren’s failed nomination.
    I think progressives will be pleased with her due to her background as a federal defender.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ads's avatar

      Manchin is an empty suit in a way that I often perceived John McCain. His criterion for what is good policy is often far more about whether it is bipartisan and often far less about substantive merit. If he plans to oppose nominees regardless of merit unless they have GOP support, that’s a man way too concerned with optics and image.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Hank's avatar

    Manchin makes his block official – not that any of us were surprised: https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/20/congress/manchin-mounts-his-own-judicial-filibuster-00148147

    So apparently Biden should be running all his nominees by Collins and Murkowski – here’s my question: if Manchin’s basically useless on nominees, which is the only thing the senate’s doing, what use is he at this point? Why doesn’t Schumer strip his committee / assignments, force him into the worst office, and basically make his life miserable? What leverage does Manchin have at this point?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Melv's avatar

      So basically he bases his votes on whether or not other senators vote for or against. Doesn’t even look at the actual nominee or his/her qualifications. Absolutely insufferable. It’s so bad that I actually look forward to a senate without Manchin/Sinema….even if its republican-controlled.

      Like

  14. Mike's avatar

    I know I said Biden needs to fill these vacancies ASAP and make deals if needed but seeing all these white male prosecutors get circuit judgeships lately still feels deflating, after some big accomplishments in diversifying the judiciary it looks like a swift back to the same ol same ol.

    Just got a bad feeling this was to avoid a fight with Blackburn. We’ll see who they pick for the second vacancy.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      Yeah it’s incredibly disappointing, but I do think it’s largely because these are red-state vacancies and there’s not much time left. And as the Mangi experience has shown, the Senate Dem caucus has a lot more cowards and bigots than many of us thought.

      I don’t think we can assume Ritz got blue slips yet – it’s Blackburn. If Biden announced tomorrow that he’s disbanding the Democratic Party to support Trump, Blackburn would start claiming that Trump is a woke liberal.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ryan J's avatar

        “I don’t think we can assume Ritz got blue slips yet – it’s Blackburn. If Biden announced tomorrow that he’s disbanding the Democratic Party to support Trump, Blackburn would start claiming that Trump is a woke liberal.”

        It’s too late now, but if Biden were willing to a few months ago (realistically he would not be), he could have pretended to support Trump and have the Dems would fight over who to unify around next.

        Liked by 1 person

    • keystone's avatar

      Yeah, there were a ton of women candidates who also seemed like they could be good noms for that seat. Not progressives but still solid candidates that wouldn’t cause an uproar. Will be interesting to see if Ritz actually gets blue slips.

      I’ve been more worried about that Nashville seat bc I haven’t been able to identify very many good but still confirmable candidates. Between the two, I actually thought that the Nashville seat had a higher likelihood of having the US Attorney be the nominee. I guess it could still happen.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. Zack's avatar

    The only thing Manchin gives us at this point is an outright majority so we don’t have to worry about deadlocked votes on the judiciary committee.
    Beyond that, nothing much.
    If nothing else, as election season heats up, Collins/Murkowski and everyone else he mentioned will be saying no for that reason alone.
    Manchin’s an idiot if he doesn’t see that.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. tsb1991's avatar

    Eumi Lee confirmed. Van Hollen wrapping up. No cloture motions sent out but it looks like the Senate is going to take another crack at that Labor Nominee whose vote failed (maybe Menendez is onboard this time)? Also sounds like a possible vote for one of the Texas nominees.

    Liked by 4 people

  18. Zack's avatar

    I would say with the Manchin news Robert White of Michigan might be waiting a bit because he will have the votes of Republican senators and Democrats will want to focus on the party line votes.
    More then ever, this should mean the Republican nominees get pushed to the back of the line.
    If red state senators want to leave their own nominees twisting in the wind, so be it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Actually this might be almost as good news as the new batch in itself. If it is true (And I say that with a grain of salt since it’s Blackburn we are talking about), then the WH nominating a red state circuit court nominee over the objections of the home state senators is terrific news. We still have another Tennesse seat as well as Florida, North Carolina & purple state Maine.

      I actually hope this is true. I get nominating Ritz for this seat since it’s Gibbons. But for the other seat, there is no reason why we can’t get another young progressive in the mold of Andre Mathis. This opens up a realm of possibilities for that seat. Perhaps another Black man, perhaps another Muslim nominee after the Mangi failure or any number of young progressive Nashville attorneys.

      Liked by 1 person

  22. Mike's avatar

    If Manchin was a better guy and he really isn’t running for office again, he could’ve taken a hit for Tester or Brown by voting for some more controversial nominees and letting one of them vote no to reduce their Biden voting numbers for their reelections.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Zack's avatar

    One could simply point out to Marsha Blackburn a list of judges confirmed under Trump that she voted for in spite of a blue slip not being returned.
    What she’s angry about is at least on Circuit Court judges to a degree, Democrats simply aren’t rolling over and nominating far right hacks or leaving a seat open cuz norms.

    Liked by 3 people

  24. keystone's avatar

    Do we think the list came out late today to prevent Blackburn from having a total meltdown during today’s Judiciary hearing?

    She claims that she and Haggerty were working in good faith with the WH to identify candidates. I wonder if she will attempt to “prove” this by releasing the name of her preferred candidate like she did with McMullen.

    Liked by 3 people

    • keystone's avatar

      There’s been A LOT of discussion about this poll on other sites and forums. The consensus that I’ve seen amounts to the race being super early. Maryland hasn’t even had its primary yet and Hogan has very strong name recognition right now versus the other candidates. The campaign hasn’t even started and nobody’s defined positions. It’s also one poll.

      Honestly, after seeing that interview Hogan gave a couple weeks ago where he actively refused to say if he’d protect abortion and IVF, he’s not gonna win.

      Since this isn’t necessarily judiciary focused, I’ll end it there.

      Liked by 5 people

  28. raylodato's avatar

    On a side note, given the D.C. Superior Court nominations, any ideas on when the previous nominees here will start getting votes? Almost all the vacancies have nominees now (there are 2 coming up) and as @Dequan points out, it can be a good feeder court.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        And there are two vacancies on the DC court of appeals. While I know it’s a 15-year term, The WH should be using the possibility (I would use the word probability) of elevation if a young progressive takes the job. Those seats should be launching pads for the DC district court if not higher in a possible second Biden term.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Thomas's avatar

      I hope they are able to confirm at least the six nominees who are ready for a floor vote before Easter by voice, as there are already 11 vacancies, tomorrow it will be 12 and from April 12, it will be 13, that means, there is absolutely no improvment in numbers since Biden became president – it has just not become worse.

      I know some people see the Superior Court as feeder court for the other ones, and I have to say again, in a distant future when the court has a full completement. On the other side, there are no judges eligible for senior status at the district court and just Henderson at the circuit court – so it doesn’t look bright for an elevation now – no third chance for Todd Edelman and the others in the next three or four years.

      Just maybe the CoA of DC with two vacancies.

      Like

  29. Mitch's avatar

    @Dequan

    I’m guessing the White House promised the Florida Senators that it would nominate Markenzy Lapointe for the next vacancy on the Southern District of Florida.

    Detra Shaw-Wilder seems to a nominee with something for everyone. Blacks and progressives are pleased to see a highly-qualified black woman get the nomination. At the same time, of all the black women considered for the judgeship, she is the most palatable to Republicans

    Shaw-Wilder is a safe and mainstream nominee. She specializes in contracts, shareholder disputes, and commercial financing. These are highly complex and technical areas of the law, fields that don’t attract ideologues.

    If she holds up well in the confirmation hearing, she’s in. Republicans won’t go out of their way to oppose her,

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I could definitely see that deal worked out, which is more than fair. But I am sure the motivating factor in the negotiations was the Wilson seat on the 11th. I hope the WH threatened somebody in the mold of Ben Crump & worked their way to the middle to get Detra Shaw-Wilder & hopefully one, two if not all three MDFL seats filled as well. Judging by their strategy with the two 6th vacancies, it sounds like they just might be using circuit court seats as bargaining chips.

      I will say this, I have said from day one there is no shot of Biden getting to 230 judges (Sorry, you all know I don’t court the 4 Trump judges that were elevated twice so no 234 for me… Lol) by the end of his first term. But I will admit there is a chance if the WH is really starting to use these circuit court vacancies to bargain for district court seats getting filled.

      Just from the current vacancies, we got 3-MDFL, 2-NC & Maine. I doubt the WDTN will get filled this year if Blackburn is refusing to support Ritz but that’s fine. If we can get a little luck with Texas, the remaining Indiana & maybe just maybe the EDWI seats, Biden would be within smelling distance of 230 by the end of the year barring any change in the senate composition before then.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Joe's avatar

        Dequan, for the first time I think I’m now ready to predict that Biden will pass Trumps number of Article III judges. If every current nominee gets confirmed plus every blue state/appellate vacancy that would put him at 233. And I still predict we’ll get at least one Maine district judges and possibly a handful of additional new openings. And, as you said, clearly they’re still working on deals for FL, NC, and possibly other states.

        I know Biden and Schumer are motivated by Trumps record, so I think they’ll do everything possible to get it done.

        Like

  30. Zack's avatar

    @Dequan, that was me on Hogan and I stand by that.
    As it stands, that poll also shows more the 34% of the people who responded it didn’t know enough about the Democrats in the race and Hogan is mostly going off his name.
    At this point in time, polls showed Steve Bullock, Phil Bredesen, Linda Lingle among others who were governors in states opposite of them on a state level having a huge lead in their senate races before they got their clocks cleaned.
    It’s one thing to be a governor of a state where the other party controls the legislature that can keep you in check.
    It’s quite another to be a senator that can be the deciding vote on liberal/conservative judges, given a person of the opposite party in the WH/Senate the keys etc.
    Also, with reproductive rights being a major issue, the fact someone who has already stuck his foot in his mouth on it several times being given a free reign to a Senate seat in a deep blue state is unlikely.
    Can anything happen?
    Yes but Brown/Tester are in trouble this year because ticket splitting rarely happens anymore.
    The idea Larry Hogan in a deep blue state is going to be able to overcome what so many others couldn’t, especially with the crazy on a federal level from Republicans (look at their proposal to raise the social security age) is highly unlikely IMO.

    Liked by 3 people

  31. tsb1991's avatar

    The Senate Press Gallery has a “further votes are possible” disclaimer for tomorrow after the votes on the Labor nominee and a Congressional Review Act vote, so a possibility Schydlower is confirmed tomorrow (there’s an 11:30AM vote, two 2PM votes, and any further votes after that would probably be 5:30PM). I did kinda sorta joke about donating to Schumer’s Super PAC if there’s a full day tomorrow, would that be Senate Majority PAC? I think Harry Reid’s people ran that Super PAC so it may have been passed down to Schumer lol. We’ll see.

    It also sounds like there won’t be any expedited Senate vote to pass the minibus, so any minibus votes could go into the weekend and eat up some of the two-week break.

    For that Maryland Senate poll, a key part of that poll is that Maryland voters prefer a Democratic-controlled Senate 55-35, so that will be hammered hard by whoever the Democratic nominee in that race will be (Alsobrooks or Trone). Lots of similarities to say, Indiana Senate in 2016 (where Evan Bayh tried to make a comeback for Senate, early polls showed him up by a sizable amount but residency issues and the partisanship of Indiana won out in the end), and Tennessee in 2018 (Bredesen, who won re-election as governor in a landslide in 2006 and sweeping every county, started out with leads in the polls but some people had learned their lessons at this point and put little stock into them as the consensus was that the partisanship of Tennessee would prevail. In the end Bredesen lost by 11 so not a close race but he did far outrun the lean of Tennessee where Republicans typically win by 30 points). Same thing in Maryland, Hogan would have to overcome a 30+ point Biden win in Maryland with Trump on the ballot, it’d be like if Manchin ran and had to share a ballot with Trump who’d win West Virginia by 40+, or Doug Jones in 2020 when Trump was on the ballot and had to deal with a high-turnout, presidential electorate in Alabama where Trump handily won.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Zack's avatar

    Back to judges, I can go with the idea a couple of posters have made in that the WH is getting some district court nominees in places like FL by playing hardball with the Circuit Court nominee (though I still won’t object if they do a Ben Crump type nominee at the end.)
    Given that, pretty safe bet the vacancy on TN’s district court is going to stay that way, as Blackburn has made clear she isn’t open to any deals, even when it’s someone like Kevin Ritz (who again is an appeasement to the judge he’ll be replacing then Blackburn/Hagerty)
    I will say given what Manchin said today that we are going to likely see more party line votes, as he has given all Republicans an excuse to vote no going forward.
    I will hate that his seat flipping means it will be harder to keep the senate and confirm judges but I won’t be sorry to see him go.

    Liked by 2 people

  34. Gavi's avatar

    It’s very much likely that Marsha Blackburn had prior notice as to when the WH would announce Kevin Ritz.

    Going by prior announcements, we’ve seen the WH give home state principals a heads up about the date of announcement.

    Also, Blackburn’s statement about the nomination has been on her website for 23 hours, at this point (Google “marsha blackburn kevin ritz” and you see the timestamp). Maybe we just need to check home state senators’ website for advance announcements of nominees? That’s it! Every “nomination-announcement-Wednesday” I will be checking Blackburn’s website to see another one of these beautiful statements. This statement is only 1 paragraph but I might actually print, laminate, and frame it! Not so much because Ritz is such a stellar nominee, but for the sweet tears of Blackburn.

    On another note, if the TN senators aim to blue slip Ritz, this might mean no Graham/Collins/Murkowski vote. This, in turn, would now mean no Manchin. I NEVER complain about tight votes, but I hope Schumer will have the VP on standby. I know a combo of that trio (or just Collins?) has voted for nominees with only 1 negative blue slip, but has any of them voted for a nominee with NO Republican blue slip? If the answer is no, I doubt they would start voting yes under that circumstance now. Even so, I don’t care, as long as the AYE vote gets one more than the NO.

    Liked by 4 people

  35. Mitch's avatar

    This has me wondering about Camille McMullen, who the Senators recommended for the appellate court and could be a nominee for District Court in Western Tennessee. It seems that Blackburn and Hagerty think well of Judge McMullen. 

    Liked by 1 person

  36. Zack's avatar

    Sen. Collins voted for Anthony Johnstone despite Sen.Daines not returning his blue slip (and having a temper tantrum about it.) so she could very well be a vote for Ritz, especially since he’s a prosecutor which she rarely goes against and Sen.Kennedy voted for Mathis despite Blackburn doing the same.
    As for Blackburn, as a resident of NY I can still recall how during the Trump years she and other Republicans had no issues ramming five far right hacks onto the 2nd Circuit despite the fact there isn’t a single Republican senator among the states in it and if Trump/Republicans had won in 2020, they would have done the same with the seats of Rosemary Pooler, Robert Katzmann and Peter Hall without a second thought.
    Why I get a delight out of the fact that on her watch, three seats (including one flip) aren’t going to be filled with arch conservatives and there isn’t a darn thing she can do about it.

    Liked by 2 people

  38. Hank's avatar

    One poster suggested that Blackburn thinks highly of McMullen or would support her for a district court – that’s highly unlikely.  Blackburn’s been using McMullen as a prop (quite insulting to McMullen really), and she’s more likely to endorse Biden for president than approve a district court nominee 6 months before the election for a vacancy that has existed since September 2022.

    Also, Blackburn’s reference to a “backroom deal” seems to be accusing Gibbons of conditioning taking senior status only if Ritz were replaced. Probably not unreasonable since a lot of us assume that too. Given that the result was a career prosecutor who could be as conservative as Gibbons, however, Blackburn’s complaints make it clear that she was never going to sign off on anyone.

    I’m slightly more optimistic about getting a decent nominee the Nashville seat now – I don’t think the WH would want to give Blackburn the attack angle of “how dare the Democrats replace three women with three men,” so I think it has to be a woman and the US Attorney for MDTN is out. I’d also guess that after the whole Mangi debacle, they go with someone white who hasn’t done anything relating to criminal defense. Wouldn’t be surprised if it’s one of the Vanderbilt professors I mentioned in an earlier post (but not Lauren Sudeall for the two reasons above).

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      And also, is Gibbons the first judge to be replaced by her former clerk under the Biden administration? I know King and Rawlinson tried to arrange that, but weren’t successful – King I can understand b/c Manchin is a pain, but I’m surprised Rawlinson couldn’t pull it off behind-the-scenes and felt a need to talk about it to the press (which made it even less likely)

      Sanchez on CA9 clerked for Paez and filled one of the 3 open CA seats when Paez/Berzon/Fletcher went senior, but he technically filled Berzon’s seat rather than Paez’s.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Yea I believe Ritz would be the first. Of course doing it in private is the key. That’s the reason judge Kanne rescinded when VP Pence blocked his former law clerk from getting the nomination. But I’m happy that happened because Biden ended up flipping the seat.

        I too think had Rawlinson’s kept her mouth shut publicly it could have worked out. Especially since the husband of Berna Rhodes-Ford is the Attorney General of Nevada & well connected.

        Judge King on the other hand was less likely. For some reason Manchin wanted to go to bat for a personal friend over somebody he himself appointed. Two huge missed opportunities I wish that could have been worked out behind the scenes. Biden would only be 3 short of Trump’s 54 circuit court judges once all of the pending vacancies are confirmed had those two stepped down.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Also Ritz oversaw the federal criminal prosecution of five officers charged with killing Tyre Nichols & violating his civil rights. He was also part of the U.S. Department of Justice’s announcement that it would be opening a pattern-or-practice investigation into the Memphis Police Department. I may have to bump his grade up a bit. He’s definitely a solid replacement for Gibbons.

        (Joe Biden taps U.S. Attorney Kevin Ritz as Sixth Circuit Judge nominee (commercialappeal.com))

        Like

      • Hank's avatar

        I guarantee you that Blackburn is going to try and say Ritz is anti-cop because of that a pattern & practice investigation into the Memphis PD (while conveniently neglecting to mention that the investigation was because of the Tyre Nichols case). 

        I have a feeling that something about Ritz will keep that attack from working on Cortez Masto and the other Dem moderates though…what could it be…White could it be…

        Liked by 2 people

    • Frank's avatar

      Why would you believe Blackburn that there was some sort of deal for the Gibbons seat when you don’t trust her on anything else (and I don’t think you are crazy for that)? While people here (myself included) have made note to her possibly revoking the decision to take senior status, even though she was nominated by a Republican her clerks have tended to be more to the left and based on her decisions she is no FedSoc hack. Can’t someone just want to retire without thinking of politics these days? Technically Ritz could still be nominated for the Stranch seat as well, there’s nothing stopping that even though it wouldn’t make sense geographically.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Hank's avatar

        Good point, Frank – I don’t actually believe that there was some back-room conspiracy as Blackburn is alleging. I think it’s more likely that the WH just assumed (as we all did) that Gibbons might retract her senior status if she didn’t like her successor. The easiest way to avoid that problem was to nominate one of her clerks. Ritz (a white guy career prosecutor who got the TN senators sign-off for the US Attorney position) was probably the safest choice even if (as expected) Blackburn comes up with some pretext to oppose the nomination.

        Ideology doesn’t track with wanting influence over a successor – Kanne (far-right), Rawlinson (slightly center-right on most issues despite being a Clinton appointee), and King (center-left) have all done it. The Gibbons case does show that judges can successfully influence the selection of their successor, which makes it more surprising to me that Rawlinson couldn’t get who she wanted.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        I think in the case of Rawlinson, the biggest problem is one of the Nevada senators (I can’t remember which one now) said any 9th circuit court vacancy will have a commission established to recommend possible nominees to the president. She probably figured that process would not lead to the wife of the Attorney General being selected over the number of sitting judges (Both state & federal) in the state that would have applied, let alone all of the numerous private practice & government attorneys.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Hank's avatar

        Oh that’s right – thanks Dequan, I forgot about that. Using a commission for a circuit seat is pretty unusual (those are more for district seats) as the WH is more involved with circuit seats. I’m sure the WH could’ve pressured the commission to strongly consider Rawlinson’s preferred successor (I believe there are no Black women on D. Nev., so that would’ve been a good pretext), so I wonder if Rawlinson did speak to someone in the WH and they weren’t willing to make any promises for some reason. I get the principle, but unless whatshername was just as/much more conservative than Rawlinson, I still think it would’ve been worth it to get one of the most conservative Dems off of CA9.

        Liked by 1 person

  39. Mitch's avatar

    In a Supreme Court issue, Ketanji Brown Jackson has stirred up controversy. While hearing the case Murthy vs. Missouri, she stated, “My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the federal government.”

    She’s getting condemned in several quarters. One observer stated, “That is, quite literally, the entire point of the First Amendment.”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      This was nonsense, as Mark Joseph Stearn explained:

      “Justice Jackson asked this question because Aguiñaga insisted that the government cannot even mildly encourage social media platforms to moderate content in a specific way. She was exploring the consequences of courts imposing a total gag on public officials in this context.”

      Aguinaga is the inept Louisiana SG who embarrassed himself in front of SCOTUS, and “several quarters” were the nutjob right-wing blogs.

      Not that this matters, as KBJ is on SCOTUS and doesn’t give a damn what the hacks of the National Review think.

      Liked by 2 people

  40. keystone's avatar

    I found the remarks Kevin Ritz gave when he became US Attorney. If you aren’t familiar with him it gives a good overview of his resume and who he is as a person. I thought this bit was interesting…..

    “Thank you to previous U.S. Attorneys, and all my previous supervisors, who have helped shape my 
    skills and career. There are too many to name, but I have to single out two: Judge Gibbons and Ed 
    Stanton. Both gave me tremendous opportunities along the way, and both have served as mentors and 
    role models.”

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdtn/pr/investiture-remarks-kevin-g-ritz

    His career is pretty spotless. The man is a boy scout.. like he’s legitimately an Eagle Scout.

    As some have already speculated, the Tyre Nichols case will probably make an appearance in his confirmation hearing. The other, somewhat related area, that might make an appearance is the fact that Memphis has a high crime rate. Will be interesting to see Blackburn sit by as her colleague portray one of the largest cities in her state as being a hell hole… and a man she previously signed off on as being a cause. The plus side is that I’m sure it will make for a great campaign ad for Blackburn’s Senate opponent.

    Liked by 3 people

  41. Gavi's avatar

    What a colossal blunder it would be for Biden to nominate Ritz for the Stranch seat instead of the Gibbons. I don’t mind being a critic of the Biden WH’s overall judicial process, but not even I could see them making such a mistake. Get the conditionally retired Republican off the bench first, then go to town on the other vacancy.

    But as I type, Frank, I now remember that this scenario isn’t so farfetched. This was how the WH handled the Cabranes vacancy on CA2! Hmmm, still unlikely, but I can’t totally put it past the WH to make such an error.

    Also, I like how we’re not talking about Camille McMullen, even though some folks were so high on her getting the nomination. It wouldn’t have taken over half a year for them to pick her. Besides the unrighteous indignation that we’ll get in Ritz’s confirmation hearing, I hope we’ll hear the names the TN senators feigned recommending to the WH.

    I agree with Hank that now that we know this nominee, the next is very likely to be a female. Do I hear a Camille McMullen? Going once… going twice…

    Going back to Manchin. What a guy. His statement will singlehandedly make the confirmation process for the rest of the year more or less a party-line affair.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Aubrey's avatar

      To be fair, Detra Shaw-Wilder’s name has also been floating around for a Florida district court seat for quite a while, and she only just got nominated. The main reason I would discount Camille McMullen now is that I don’t think all three Tennessee-based Sixth Circuit seats will be based in Memphis. If Blackburn and Hagerty were willing, I could see McMullen proposed for the Western District of Tennessee seat, but I doubt they’ll return a blue slip for anyone, and McMullen might prefer her current job as a state appellate judge to being a trial judge.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Gavi's avatar

        I think there are different issues.

        You have one being speculation based on who would be an obvious choice, The other is based on credible (often local) reporting. The latter could be delayed/held up due to other negotiations—not due to needing a final decision. The SD and FL nominees fall within this more credible category. McMullen and all the number of non-nominees fall within the speculation pile, based on just vibes.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Gavi's avatar

        Yes, the previous vacancy. But that’s not the vacancy we’re talking about, is it? At any rate, it held up; she was still *not* the nominee. Unless we’re to hold as credible the assumption that a previously considered candidate is forever a frontrunner for subsequent vacancies.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Hank's avatar

        Yeah I guarantee you that if the WH were willing to go with McMullen, Blackburn would’ve found some reason to change her mind again – I think with senators negotiating in good faith, the runner-up for one vacancy is likely in contention (if not a frontrunner) for a future vacancy to the same court. 

        But as someone else pointed out, Blackburn/Hagerty are literally the only senators who’ve been unable to reach a deal with the WH – the WH even signed off on Ramirez to get Cruz and Cornyn on board. I think the delay is more about the fact that Blackburn would’ve never returned a blue slip no matter who the WH suggested.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Joe's avatar

        Exactly Hank. My guess is the WH gave them a reasonable timeframe for recommendations and then the TN senators tried to delay. And then the WH went instead with the suggested candidate.

        Hopefully Hagerty at least will support, but if not then it’ll be a tougher confirmation. Ritz seems like a very traditional, highly qualified candidate.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Aubrey's avatar

        It hasn’t been uncommon at all over the years for runners up for previous vacancies to get the nomination when a new vacancy opens up. So, to use your illustration from earlier, we should put those candidates in the credibly reported pile, not the vibes pile. Of course, the question is how sincerely McMullen was considered the first time, which we don’t really know beyond her confirmation that Tennessee’s senators approached her and recommended her to the White House.

        Liked by 1 person

  42. Joe's avatar

    I agree, Gavi. I understand his push for bipartisanship but I don’t really get his logic. With this position he’s basically just ceding his vote over to Murkowski and Collins and agreeing to do whatever they decide.

    If he really cared about bipartisanship he’d be doing the opposite and trying to pull them over to vote with Democrats more often, but it doesn’t appear he sees it that way.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      Manchin doesn’t do logic, and he never has – this is just him trying to distance himself from Biden and show that he’s “not like other Democrats.” Maybe because he has post-senate plans that involve running for something again, maybe because he’s getting back at the Dems for forcing him to vote for all those nominees in 2021 and 2022, or maybe (and I think this is the answer) he just wants more attention.

      Liked by 3 people

  43. Joe's avatar

    Looking ahead, the next date we should look at for nominees is either April 3 or 10 for a SJC hearing on May 1 or 8. There actually should be two SJC hearings in May, if everything goes to plan.

    Beyond the nominees from yesterday, there is a maximum of 9 more SJC hearings between now and November whose nominees could realistically be confirmed this year.

    Liked by 4 people

  45. Zack's avatar

    IMO, what Blackburn or other Republicans are doing right now is trying to see if there’s anyone Ritz’s office charged but had out on pretrial release/cut a deal with who went on to commit another crime or who didn’t get a long enough of a sentence for their liking to portray him as a soft on crime weakling who doesn’t deserve a Circuit Court seat.
    That is what their line of attack seems to be now and since it worked with Edelman and is likely the reason Aframe’s vote is being dragged out, why stop now?

    Liked by 1 person

  46. tsb1991's avatar

    Menendez flipped to yes on that Labor nominee, so he should be confirmed later today (one of the other reasons the vote failed the first time around was that Democrats had numerous members absent and Republicans outnumbered them that day). Also, am I the only one who sees the humor in Menendez showing up in the Senate every day to vote when he seemingly has an indictment a day?

    Also, after the April hearing, there’s the potential for two hearing slots when the Senate is back in May, 5/1 and 5/15 or 5/8 and 5/22. The deadline for a 5/1 hearing is 4/3 (two weeks from now), 4/10 would be the 5/8 deadline.

    The Senate, when they get back in two weeks, are in for two weeks before another week break and both of those weeks include Monday sessions.

    Liked by 2 people

  47. Dequan's avatar

    Looks like both sides are still going back & forth on Mangi. This is from the congressional record from the senate floor today…

    10:47 a.m. Senator Durbin spoke on the Mangi nomination and later on competition in the debit and credit card markets

    10:37 a.m. Republican Leader McConnell spoke on the nomination of Adeel Mangi.

    Also I see Menendez voted for Rodriguez after voting against him earlier this year. Don’t get me started on him & how crooked he is today. I’m just happy it appears Mr. Rodriguez is finally on the path to confirmation.

    Like

  49. star0garnet's avatar

    In answer to the question yesterday, Ritz is Biden’s seventh nominee to have clerked for their predecessor:

    Jinsook Ohta, vice Barry Ted Moskowitz, SD CA
    KBJ, vice Breyer, SCOTUS
    Jamar Walker, vice Rayond Jackson, ED VA
    Anthony Johnstone, vice Sidney Thomas, 9th Cir
    Seth Aframe, vice Jeffrey Howard, 1st Cir
    Melissa Damian, vice Ursula Ungaro, SD FL
    Kevin Ritz, vice Julia Smith Gibbons, 6th Cir

    As for the leading judges in terms of clerks nominated by Biden:

    4: Betty Binns Fletcher, 9th Cir (Sung, Nathan, Cartwright, Berner)
    3: RBG, SCOTUS (Heytens, Kobick, Subramanian)
    3: Guido Calabresi, 2nd Cir (Bloomekatz, Micah Smith, Sooknanan)
    3: Michael Mukasey, SD NY (barf; Pan, Farbiarz, Sarah Russell)

    For SCOTUS clerks, we have:

    3: RBG
    2: Stevens (Nathan Calabretta)
    2: Breyer (KBJ, Bloomekatz)
    1: Souter (Micah Smith)
    1: Sotomayor (Sooknanan)
    1: Kagan (Brad Garcia)

    Liked by 2 people

  50. Lillie's avatar

    Are there any (probably has to be white so they can’t have a rap sheet) women who are reproductive rights advocates in Nashville or close enough to the seat who could qualify? Sounds like a perfect nominee for Blackburn to cry about and then the other republicans to twist themselves into pretzels trying to condemn and get away from.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      Yes, Tracey George is a Vanderbilt law professor who is on the board of Planned Parenthood: https://law.vanderbilt.edu/bio/?pid=tracey-george (look at her CV)

      Her bio is also very conventional:

      “Tracey George brings a social science perspective to a range of topics, including judges and courts, judicial selection and elections, legal education and the legal profession, and contract law and theory. She has published numerous studies in which she examines how institutional design influences actions and outcomes in state and federal judicial systems. She is also a recognized expert on the study of legal education. She and UCLA Law Professor Russell Korobkin have published an innovative casebook on contract law, a subject for which she has earned Vanderbilt’s student-selected Hall-Hartman Award for Outstanding Teaching eight times.”

      She’s probably around 57, so she’s on the older side (though Stranch was about this age at the time of her nomination). The age and boring resume might appeal to Collins/Murkowski in a way that a younger progressive wouldn’t. That being said, if Collins/Murk are going to vote no because of the lack of a blue slip, the WH might as well pick a younger/more liberal candidate.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to star0garnet Cancel reply