Judge Rebecca Pennell – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington

After the stalling of Judge Charnelle Bjelkengren’s nomination to replace Judge Salvador Mendoza, Washington Court of Appeals Judge Rebecca Pennell has been put forward as an alternative.

Background

Pennell received her B.A. from the University of Washington in 1993 and a J.D. from Stanford Law School in 1996. Pennell subsequently clerked for Judge Robert Whaley on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington before joining TeamChild as a Skadden Fellow, working on juvenile legal services in Yakima, Washington.

In 2000, Pennell became a public defender with the Federal Defenders of Eastern Washington and Idaho. Pennell stayed with the office until she was appointed to the Washington Court of Appeals in 2016. Pennell currently serves as a judge on that court.

History of the Seat

Pennell has been nominated for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. This seat opened on September 16, 2022, when Judge Salvador Mendoza was elevated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. President Biden previously nominated Charnelle Bjelkengren, a state court judge based in Spokane, to fill the vacancy. However, after a poor performance at her confirmation hearing, Bjelkengren’s nomination stalled and was ultimately not resubmitted by the Administration.

Legal Experience

Between 2000 and 2016, Pennell served as a federal public defender for Eastern Washington and Idaho, representing indigent defendants in federal criminal cases. Among her notable cases, Pennell represented Devonn Deshea Kinsey, arguing that police officers erred in patting down Kinsey and uncovering a pistol magazine. See United States v. Kinsey, 952 F. Supp. 2d 970 (E.D. Wash. 2013). Judge Edward Shea disagreed, denying the motion to suppress. See id.

Pennell’s duties included arguing a number of appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. See, e.g., United States v. Hernandez-Hernandez, 374 F.3d 808 (9th Cir. 2004). In one notable case, Pennell successfully argued that the government had erred in seeking to admit evidence after the defendant opened the door to officers who then entered his trailer without a warrant. See United States v. Quaempts, 411 F.3d 1046 (9th Cir. 2005). In another notable case that Pennell handled, the Ninth Circuit reversed Judge Fred Van Sickle’s decision to overturn a jury conviction for possessing a firearm while under a domestic violence restraining order. See United States v. Young, 458 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2006).

Jurisprudence

Since 2016, Pennell has served as a judge on the Washington Court of Appeals. Among her notable decisions on this court, Pennell joined a ruling holding that Washington’s Dealing in Depictions of a Minor Engaged in Sexually Explicit Activity prohibited a juvenile male’s texting of a picture of his genitalia to an adult female. See State v. E.G., 377 P.3d 272 (Wash. App. 3d Div. 2016). In doing so, the court rejected arguments that the statute couldn’t be applied against the “victim” of the conduct and that the statute violates the First Amendment. See id.

In other notable opinions, Pennell dissented from a Court of Appeals decision affirming an assault conviction, finding that the state’s evidence failed to show more than that the defendant “had been present at the scene of a crime.” See State v. Fleming, No. 33644-1-Ill. (Wash. App. 3d Div. Apr. 18, 2017) (Pennell, J., dissenting). In another case, Pennell overturned a trial court decision barring the defendant from contact with his son for five years, finding that the ruling failed to adequately consider the defendant’s fundamental right to parent his son. See State v. Torres, No. 33648-4-Ill. (Wash. App. 3d Div. Apr. 13, 2017). In yet another opinion, Pennell dissented from a decision affirming convictions for a defendant charged with assaulting a police officer, finding that the trial court should have rejected the defendant’s request to represent himself, given his severe mental illness. See State v. Evatt, No. 34963-2-Ill. (Wash. App. 3d Div. June 6, 2017).

Additionally, Pennell has also served as Justice Pro Tempore with the Washington Supreme Court, where she reversed convictions for felony murder, finding that the record did not support a finding that the defendant had robbed a safe as a predicate condition for the felony murder. See Matter of Knight, 538 P.3d 263 (Wash. 2023). Justice Virginia Madsen dissented from Pennell’s opinion. See id. (Madsen, J., dissenting).

Political Activity

Pennell has frequently donated to political candidates during her time as an attorney, including to many Washington Democrats including former Governor Christine Gregoire. Her sole donation after joining the bench has been to fellow Court of Appeals Judge Tracy Staab, when she was a candidate in 2020.

Overall Assessment

Over the last three decades, Pennell has gathered a significant degree of experience with both civil and criminal law. If confirmed, Pennell is likely to add a left-leaning presence to the Eastern District of Washington.

87 Comments

  4. Schumer could adjust the senate schedule correct. They have the week of April 22nd as a recess week.. Perhaps they can be in that week and make the recess one of the weeks in May when Menendez’s trial will start ? Probably won’t happen but I guess it’s at least possible

    Liked by 1 person

  5. If Judge Pennell is confirmed, I wonder if Charnelle Bjelkengren would be a likely successor. Most of her trouble in the confirmation hearing came from her lack of experience in federal courts, which wouldn’t apply to a state court.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Now I wonder how soon we’ll get a nominee for the other seats where the previous nominees withdrew:

    • WDNY: One name I’d keep an eye on is Tiffany H. Lee (born c. 1972), the Appellate Chief of the US Attorney’s office for that district. No political donations on record but she did clerk for G.W. Bush appointed 2nd Circuit Judge Richard Wesley (when he was a Judge on the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court). She is AAPI per her LinkedIn profile picture. https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdny/appellate-division
    • For the Southern District of California, we may need two new nominees given how many hearings Kanter has missed but one name I’d keep an eye on is California Court of Appeal Judge Jose Scher Castillo (born c. 1978). He is a Democrat per the press release announcing his appointment but is a former AUSA and served in the Marine Corps prior to attending college which should be enough to get some Republican votes.
    • Also on the California Court of Appeal in San Diego, is Judge Truc Do (born c. 1971), who is Vietnamese-American and she came to the US at the age of 3 as her family were war refugees.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. On a Circuit Court level under Trump, only Ryan Bounds withdrew when it was clear there weren’t votes for him.
    On a district court level, several did because the blue slip rule was kept in place for district court nominees and certain nominees in WI,NY among other places didn’t get through due to that.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. I’m understanding from Mitch from the Vargas post that Angela Martinez got tripped up by a Senator John Kennedy 10th Amendment question.

    Kennedy really annoys me with these gotcha 1st year of year law school academic quizzes. That’s how he sank Judge Bjelkengren’s nomination.

    I liken it to anyone (including Kennedy) being quizzed with questions for a drivers license test. If any of us got that kind of quiz, we would get a number of the answers wrong…because it has been YEARS since we took a drivers license test. But we damn well know how to drive a car!!!

    In the same way, Bjelkengren and Martinez may not do well with academic questions that they have not addressed since way back in law school. But they damn well know how to do judicial work.

    Kennedy’s gotcha questions are solely for senators and talking heads who generally oppose Biden’s nominees (because they’re Biden’s nominees) and are just looking for a reason to hang their hats on.

    Somebody should really call Kennedy out on his BS!!!

    Liked by 2 people

    • I agree to a certain extent where you are coming from (some of the questions I think are a bit unfair) but I expect someone who is being nominated to a lifetime judicial appointment to know what is and isn’t in the constitution. Bjelkengren isn’t ready to be a federal judge, plain and simple, based on her committee performance. Not to mention that maybe people should have to retake their driving tests, but that’s well outside of the scope of this conversation.

      Liked by 1 person

      • @Frank, that’s a very similar argument to the layman’s misimpression that lawyers should have total recall about everything having to do with the law without the benefit of research. If an area of law is not part of what a particular lawyer deals with often in the course of their practice, I tend not to judge them very harshly.

        As someone wise once said, being a good lawyer isn’t about knowing all the law. It’s knowing how to find the law.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Literally no judge is ever going to be deciding questions of constitutional law off the top of their heads without actually researching the case law and controlling precedent on the issue. If anything, the rules of evidence (not the constitution) are what a trial judge should know, as judges have to rule on objections in-the-moment during trial. 

        When it comes to arguments about what a constitutional provision means, Bjelkengren (as any other district judge) would just pull up the section at issue, look into the case law discussing that section, and apply the controlling precedent—none of that requires her to know every part of the constitution like the back of her hand. It would actually be more concerning for a judge to be so cocky that they assume they know how a specific provision works without doing the research.

        Go learn how judges actually do their jobs before making baseless claims about what they should or shouldn’t know.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @Hank,

        I have been saying this endlessly since her hearings. But some folks on here seem to think that because Bjelkengren “looked like a deer in the headlight” she shouldn’t be confirmed. Kato Crews didn’t know what a Brady Motion is, but because he didn’t look like a deer in the headlight, that doesn’t matter, or so the convenient logic goes. For a trial judge a Brady Motion is 100x more important to know than articles of the constitution. Don’t get me wrong, I never held the Brady Motion question against Crews, but it’s necessary to use him to highlight the hypocrisy.

        One has to wonder what is exactly the difference between them, with one getting the benefit of the doubt and the other dismissed as a dolt.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Gavi yes exactly. I wasn’t particularly excited about Bjelkengren (and I think Pennell is a better candidate because she’s more progressive), but too many people (both on this blog and senators who are not lawyers, such as Rosen) have no idea what they’re talking about (or in Rosen’s case, doing) when it comes to judges.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Frank do you know anything about the legal system at all? 

        The literal job of judges is applying the law, not just “looking it up”—and besides, being able to “look up” and find the exact case (out of tens of thousands of cases, if not more) that applies to a specific situation is a skill in itself that a lot of lawyers (let alone law students) don’t even have. How do you determine which cases, statutes, regulations, etc. dictate the outcome when presented with a certain set of facts? Especially when one lawyer is arguing that one case/statute/etc applies and the other is arguing a different case does? 

        By your flawed logic, any kid who’s played football once or twice in elementary school referee the Super Bowl.

        Crews was a magistrate judge – that’s about as close to being a district judge as possible. Sounds like he just didn’t handle criminal cases or at least had never handled a Brady motion as a magistrate judge—which is not unexpected.

        Just stick to commenting about how certain nominees are too liberal for your Republican tastes—when it comes to what judges actually do, you’re even more out of your depth than normal.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Hi all… I am the person who said Bjelkengren “looked like a deer in the headlight”. I see we keep repeating that one line without repeating everything else I said so let me repeat a few things. 

        Once an attorney makes it to the point they have been nominated to be a federal judge by the president, they all are qualified. They all have passed law school, they all have passed the Bar, they all have argued cases in court & most have clerked for a judge. So saying I wouldn’t vote for a nominee is never based on me thinking they are unqualified. 

        It all comes down to what I want in a federal judge. I want young progressives in all circuit court & district court seats that don’t require a Republican blue slip. In Bjelkengren’s case, I wasn’t too thrilled about her nomination in the first place. 

        There were more progressive options in the EDWA. Her horrible hearing only added on to her being a bad nominee. Her being asked to list ten cases on her SJCQ & only being able to list SIX all combined was just a bridge too far for even me, somebody who wants to see president Biden full as many seats as possible. 

        Kato Crews on the other hand had a progressive background. So yes, I pushed for him to be confirmed despite having a bad hearing, although not nearly as bad as Bjelkengren’s hearing. 

        And let’s not forget I also said had Bjelkengren’s hearing been closer to the election or even after the election that saw either Biden or sender Democrats lose, I would have been her biggest advocate to get confirmed. I am unabashedly political when it comes to judges just like Republicans. I wanted a better nominee than Bjelkengren with the time we had left & that had happened. 

        Liked by 2 people

  10. Now that the budget and all other major bills have passed the senate, I’ve really hyped myself up on the thought that they will confirm all 6 district judges and at least 1 circuit nominee in the first week they return and maybe another 3+ in the second week.

    They’re so close to 200 confirmations (if you double count nominees for elevations) they have to know that would be a big brag for Senate Dems and help Biden’s current momentum and messaging that he’s still getting things done.

    I really hope they don’t trip themselves up on this by waiting until Menendez is on trial.

    Anyone know what happened between Kennedy and Biden team, they worked out a 3 person deal last year but there are still 3 more vacancies, was it a US Marshall disagreement that derailed more agreements?

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Fantastic nominee – one of the few to have experience working with juveniles/young people (I think), and she seems to have more federal court experience than Bjelkengren, which is good. Kennedy’s little pop quizzes are BS because a good judge does their research and doesn’t just rely on their memory (which can be inaccurate as case law/precedent changes), and Kennedy himself is just sometimes wrong on the law (like with Martinez).

    Folks are right that this will be a tough confirmation – though Amy Baggio was a former public defender that got confirmed to D. Oregon with little issue. But knowing that idiotic coward Jacky Rosen, she might block Pennell just as she did with Mangi/Edelman.

    Patty Murray should use her seniority to put Rosen in her place, as this seat is likely to stay vacant (potentially for years depending on the election results) if Pennell can’t get confirmed.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. This is a pretty substantial paper trail, considering the last nominee failed. As long as she does well in the hearing, Murray and Cantwell should be able to muscle her through. Annoyingly, I can already hear what Blackburn and Kennedy are going to say. Hopefully Ritz will tire Blackburn out, though.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. John Kennedy has quite the following on Youtube. There are many clips of him tripping up Biden nominees for various offices. It’s more than one channel. Lots of people respond to them. I was surprised. He’s becoming a national celebrity.

    Are there any equivalents on the Democratic side?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yeah if I had to name 10 R senators who were close to being a “national celebrity,” Kennedy would not make the list – in this day and age, some videos with comments by right-wing trolls doesn’t mean much. And this is despite my belief that Kennedy is still better than a lot of R senators when it comes to judges (he actually opposed some of Trump’s most unqualified ones). I agree that Kennedy’s whole faux-southern schtick is contrived and veers into caricature.

      And of course Franken (and all Dems) should be held to a higher standard than a Republican Party that calls for making women carry their rapists’ babies and has a presidential nominee who is a rapist. Franken didn’t do anything to get better nominees confirmed under Obama, and he was ineffective in blocking any of Trump’s hacks from the federal bench.

      No senate Dem really has the ability to get attention like (for example) AOC does. Harris got some good publicity for grilling Sessions back when she was in the Senate, but it’s harder to get coverage for praising/endorsing someone.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Franken was ineffective in blocking any of Trump’s hacks from the federal bench??? They changed the rules & eliminated blue slips for circuit court nominees thanks to his blockade. I’m happy he at least went down with a fight. His replacement is a reliable vote for the left but Frankenstein was more of a fighter. I could be standing next to Tina Smith in line at Publix & probably wouldn’t know who she was… Lol

        Liked by 2 people

      • How is getting Republicans to scrap blue slips for circuit nominees an accomplishment – Stras still got the Eighth Circuit seat in the end. And there was only a vacancy for Stras to fill because the liberal Diana Murphy didn’t take senior status until November 2016. Franken (& Obama) had 6 years to get Murphy off the bench while she could be replaced by a sane person, but they did nothing. 

        So no, Franken does not get any credit for being both ineffective and too-little-too-late on judges—the standard isn’t whether you can recognize someone in a grocery store, it’s what they actually got done. Swapping him out for Tina Smith has not been some major loss for Democrats on judges—I’m hard-pressed to see how it changed anything at all.

        And the lack of blue slips hasn’t prevented Republicans from blocking Mangi by exploiting Democratic cowardice/Rosen’s bigotry, so that doesn’t excuse all of Franken’s ineffectiveness.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I didn’t say getting Republicans to scrap blue slips was an accomplishment (Although I personally support all blue slips being scrapped). I said Franken was a fighter. He asked tough questions in the SJC & I would rather Stras had gotten on the bench because Republicans had to scrap blue slips (Which Democrats are now benefitting from) versus him just rolling over & giving his support.

        Plus Franken had a much larger following amongst people who don’t follow politics every day like those of us so he could bring more people into the fold than Tina Smith. So yes, I would say it was a drop off & and still upset to this day at the way he was treated & shown the door thanks to Gillibrand.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Gavi mentioned a while back presidents don’t usually get pre-approval from senators before announcing nominees. I said back then if not, I thought that was a dumb idea in the modern era (Maybe that was ok back when the senate was actually the most deliberative body in the world).

        The Scott Colom nomination I believe will be the last one in quite some time we see a president nominate somebody without a commitment of blue slips being returned. It would take a senator reneging on a previously approved nominee for a repeat of Colom to happen in all likelihood. In this case, with the vacancy for the 11th likely to be announced after Shaw-Wilder’s SJC hearing, I doubt she will have blue slip issues absent any major finding in her background.

        Liked by 1 person

    • So Velshi opened the segment talking about the Thurgood Marshall nomination and what he went thru as first African American nominated to SCOTUS.

      He then went to Mangi nomination and how he would be first Muslim to a Circuit court. His guest was Gregory Diskant who helped recruit Mangi some 25 years ago. He mentioned the case that is causing some grief amongst naysayers, the case where Mangi represented the family of a man killed in a NY prison by guards. The case was settled after Mangi gave a powerful opening statement. The inmate, who was mentally ill, was basically killed along a corridor where there just happened to be no audio or video. He won the family of the inmate $5 million.

      Mr Diskant then went on to mention that Senators Cortez-Masto and Cruz both voted AYE to confirm nominees in the last admin who represented people who killed cops. 

      Liked by 1 person

  18. El Paso Times did a piece about Schydlower.

    It offers a bit more background about him. Not sure I knew his dad’s from Cuba.

    He also discusses what the application process was like.

    He said that Cruz and Cornyn’s interview committed had ~30 people on it, which seems kinda big. He also talks about interviewing with U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar during the process.

    https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/news/2024/03/30/el-paso-federal-judge-leon-schydlower-reflects-on-senate-confirmation-senator-ted-cruz-john-cornyn/73098320007/

    Liked by 3 people

    • @Keystone

      Excellent article. Thanks for sharing. Great insight into the process leading up to him getting picked. Nice background in his father’s journey that helped mold him into the man he became. I particularly liked the behind the scenes look at him & his staff watching the senate vote for his confirmation (Which I believe is the longest for any Biden judge to date) just like many of us were watching. Thanks again

      Liked by 1 person

  19. I tried to make a post earlier but don’t see it (sorry if it repeats).

    I’ve been following the blog for over a year and love all of the content you all post. I have a question I never found a good answer to online: why does Louisiana have so many Federal Judges? It has 22, while comparably populated states like OR or CO have 6 and 7 respectively.

    Noting that the latter 2 may be overworked, I still feel like that doesn’t account for the difference.

    Like

    • @acmurray9

      Hi, welcome to the blog. GREAT question & one I frankly never thought of. It might have to do with Louisianna having jurisdiction over other cases besides what most other states do.

      For instance, after the United States District Court for the Canal Zone was abolished on March 31, 1982, all pending litigation was transferred to the Eastern District of Louisiana. If you notice, during the 1960’s & 1970’s, the EDLA had 12 seats added. That likely was anticipation of the added cases coming in 1982 in addition to population growth of course.

      Like

    • I think there are great compromise candidates for the remaining 5 vacancies. It will all come down to if Cornyn & Cruz really want to work in good faith to fill them in an election year. My guess is if Biden keeps climbing in the polls, they will be more willing to. This is all the more reason why they should have held off on Ramirez until getting more of the 8 district court vacancies filled. Truly a missed opportunity of historic proportions.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Thanks, keystone, for sharing that article. Very insightful. We desperately need more nominees in TX, I hope Cruz and Coryn are willing to allow a few more consensus picks through prior to the election. Cruz is an awful person, so I don’t have much faith in him. But Coryn seems like he cares about the courts fundamentally (you can sort of tell that from their interviewing style).

    Hoping we see more nominees in the next few weeks. Plenty of more district seats to fill. I am all for consensus picks… one less Federalist Society hack for Trump to appoint (should the worst case scenario happen and we seem him elected once again)

    Liked by 2 people

  22. The Senate may be occupied in April. The trial of Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for violating immigration law through mass parole and perjury in testimony before Congress. Impeachment managers have already been chosen.

    Mayorkas won’t be removed from office. But the trial will take time away from other things.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’m certainly not a part of the “There’s enough time” squad here on the blog. I will say this, if Schumer can dedicate a week to judges, we should be close to all caught up. Bazis, White & Allen should be taken care of by next Tuesday. That would just leave Aframe which will take a day, 3 pending district court nominees plus the four February 8th batch district court nominees.

      The DC Superior Court nominees could either be voice votes or a couple of days along with Ramona Villagomez Manglona. The rest of the nominees won’t be ready until May the earliest.

      Like

    • It sounds like they could just dismiss the trial altogether. Manchin is onboard with this and numerous Senate Republicans don’t sound all interested in going through this. Best case from a scheduling perspective is that it eats up a Thursday morning vote and leaves the afternoon open for maybe an Aframe cloture vote. Other good scenario is if it’s the last vote they hold on Thursday 4/18 before disappearing for two weeks.

      Liked by 2 people

  24. Word Press is Word Pressing & not letting @Ethan post. I’ll post on his behalf below…

    Mitch, it wouldn’t surprise me if all of the remaining Texas vacancies are filled by current Magistrate Judges, if they get filled at all prior to the election.

    I’m still surprised that for the Northern District of Texas vacancy in Dallas, Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford hasn’t been nominated to succeed her former boss (who she served as a career law clerk for 12 years for), now senior Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn. Nothing controversial in her background that should turn off either The White House or Cornyn and Cruz.

    For the Western District of Texas seat in El Paso that is still vacant, I wonder if they’d consider Magistrate Judge, Anne Teresa Berton. She is a former federal defender (for 14 years) but I think Cornyn and Cruz may overlook that given her military background (graduated from West Point and served in the Army for 5 years prior to attending law school) as well as her age (born c. 1964).

    Besides Chari Kelly, for the Western District of Texas seat in Austin, I’d keep an eye on Magistrate Judge Susan Hightower (born c. 1965), who worked as an attorney at the US Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board prior to being selected as a Magistrate Judge. And before that, she clerked for G.H.W. Bush appointed 5th Circuit Judge Jacques Weiner.

    For the Southern District of Texas vacancy in McAllen, Magistrate Judge Juan Alanis (born c. 1970), a former Assistant US Attorney, is a name to watch. I’d prefer Magistrate Judge Nadia Medrano (born c. 1981), a former federal defender, but I think she’s too young and progressive for Cornyn and Cruz.

    The Southern District of Texas vacancy in Houston might end up being the hardest to fill simply because of the sheer number of candidates the negotiating teams are having to go through to find a compromise candidate. I bet the White House wants a Black woman since the previous holder of the seat, Vanessa Gilmore, is a Black woman, but all the ones the White House are suggesting are probably too progressive for Cornyn and Cruz. If I were to pick any Black woman for that seat with a non-zero chance of being nominated, I’d pick former Gilmore clerk Karima Maloney (born c. 1975), who is currently private practice but used to work at the DOJ Civil Rights Division.

    Among non-Black women, the main frontrunners are Magistrate Judges:

    Sam Sheldon (born c. 1970), who used to be Chief of the DOJ Civil Division’s Healthcare Fraud Unit. He also was involved in helping people receive Presidential clemency.

    Christina Bryan (born c. 1965). She attended Harvard Law School and while she ran for a local judgeship in 2010 as a Democrat, I don’t think that will bother Cornyn and Cruz since Leon Schydlower also ran for a local judgeship as a Democrat and is younger.

    Yvonne Ho (born c. 1972). I do not believe she is related to hard right 5th circuit Judge James Ho (despite him administering the oath of office for her), as I’m sure any relationship familial between the two would’ve come up in the articles about her oath office.

    Like

  25. Since this has been a topic of conversation recently, per Politico this am: “With extra-long recesses later this year for party conventions and other election-year politicking, there’s probably only 15 weeks of Senate floor time left before votes are counted…That poses a dilemma to Majority Leader Chuck Schumer: Use that scarce time to ram through (almost) sure-thing Biden nominees? Or try to pass trickier bipartisan bills that could help vulnerable Dems in November? “We expect a mix,” Burgess and KTM write.”

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Good Morning,

    Is there speculation about potential nominees from Missouri or Alabama? In a previous discussion, there was mention that the junior Senator from Alabama might collaborate in good faith to achieve a consensus nominee. However, the question remains: will Tuberville concur? Let’s hope this administration capitalizes on every opportunity to secure and approve nominees

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jerusha Adams seems like the obvious choice in the Middle District of Alabama, having served as a career law clerk to both conservative and liberal federal judges as well as a federal prosecutor before her current position as a federal magistrate judge. The fact that she hasn’t been a part of any package deal with the Northern District of Alabama vacancy implies that Tuberville isn’t willing to cooperate on any nominees.

      I also don’t think Britt is a guaranteed cooperative senator. She votes against Biden nominees with strong Republican support, such as Leon Schydlower and Gretchen Lund.

      Liked by 1 person

  27. If nothing else, Britt will do everything she can to obstruct Biden so people will forget her horror show of the SOTU response.
    I agree with others, we aren’t going to see any nominees from AL/AR/MO on district court vacancies.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Glad she’s starting to hear cases, it looks like it took 146 days from date of comission for de Alba to have her first oral arguments. Compared to other Biden judges on the 9th Circuit, Mendoza had the smallest gap between commission date & first oral arguments (82 days), and Johnstone has the longest gap (164 days)

      Liked by 1 person

    • I have being checking every Monday to see if she has being put on the calendar .

      Even for this time, De Alba is I believe, only for a single day? I recall H.A Thomas and others sitting at least half a week for their first.

      I do find it frustrating how long it takes 9th circuit judges in general to hear cases.

      Federico and Ramirez both had their confirmations after De Alba. Yet both of them have already decided cases and heard oral arguments.

      Ramirez has already dissented in En banc polls or being pretty close to a deciding vote.

      Even Berner has heard 3 En Banc oral arguments. (Though I understand the different procedures for En Bancs in the 9th)

      Liked by 1 person

  31. As we ride out the second week of this two-week break, only things to look out for this week is the non-zero chance of nominees on Wednesday for a 5/1 hearing (although missing this deadline wouldn’t be an issue and all precedent from the past year or so would suggest nominees next week), and there are still two confirmed nominees (Lee and Gonzalez) who can take the bench at any time but have yet to have their commissions issued.

    I know we’ve talked about the Senate executive calendar being fairly light and obviously judges should remain the top priority as they’d be on the bench long after Biden leaves office, the only other possible nominations I’d expedite this year are other nominees who would remain in their positions in the event Biden loses. I believe there’s an SEC seat Biden could fill and several USPS Governors seats whose terms expire this year, for example.

    Also, I wonder if Allen ends up being the final vote next Tuesday. Given she was a unanimous vote out of the SJC (although Rankin, Gonzalez, and Schydlower got a voice vote or expedited votes despite not being unanimous SJC votes), I wonder if her confirmation vote would be “expedited” on Tuesday in the sense that they just withdraw the cloture motion and vote on straight up confirmation, so the Senators don’t need to stick around Tuesday night (this was done with a few Amtrak Board of Directors if I remember).

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a comment