Judge Anne Hwang – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Judge Anne Hwang currently serves on the Los Angeles County Superior Court. If confirmed to the federal bench, Hwang would bring a background in litigation and in indigent defense to the bench.

Background

Born in 1976, Anne Hwang received a B.A. from Cornell University in 1997 and a J.D. from the University of Southern California Law School in 2002. After graduating, Hwang worked as a litigation associate at Irell & Manella LLP for four years and then became a federal public defender with the Central District of California.

In December 2018, Hwang was appointed to the Superior Court for Los Angeles County by Governor Jerry Brown, where she has served since.

History of the Seat

Hwang has been nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, to a seat vacated on November 3, 2023, by Judge George Wu.

Legal Experience

Hwang started her legal career at the firm of Irell & Manella LLP. While at the firm, Hwang represented NBC Studios in a contract dispute with the production company Sander/Moses . See Sander/Moses Prods. Inc. v. NBC Studios, Inc., 48 Cal. Rptr. 3d 525 (Cal. App. 4th 2006).

Hwang spent the bulk of her career as a federal public defender based in Los Angeles. Notably, Hwang represented Veronica Garcia-Lopez who was convicted of illegally re-entering the United States after having previously been deported for trafficking 4.2 ounces of cocaine. See United States v. Garcia-Lopez, 691 F. Supp. 2d 1099 (C.D. Cal. 2010). Hwang was able to present sufficient mitigation to convince Judge Cormac Carney that the 41-51 month sentencing guidelines range was unduly harsh. See id. at 1101. Carney instead imposed a six month sentence on the defendant. See id. at 1105.

Jurisprudence

Since 2019, Hwang has served as a judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court. In this role, Hwang presides over trial court matters in criminal, civil, family, and other state law matters. Notably, as a judge, Hwang dismissed a lawsuit brought against Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon and the probation department by the families of an officer fatally shot by an individual previously prosecuted and given a plea deal by Gascon. Judge Finds Issues with Suit’s Breach of Mandatory Duty Claims, My News LA, Sept. 11, 2023, https://mynewsla.com/crime/2023/09/11/judge-finds-issues-with-suits-breach-of-mandatory-duty-claims/#google_vignette. Hwang nonetheless allowed the plaintiffs to amend their suit. See id.

Hwang has also been active in the Korean American community as a judge, speaking, for example as a Korean American Bar Association event on implicit bias in 2022.

Overall Assessment

Having practiced both civil and criminal law in the Los Angeles area for two decades at this point, as well as serving as a sitting state court judge, Hwang can be deemed to have the experience needed to be a U.S. District Judge. Nonetheless, Hwang’s nomination is likely to draw opposition based on her extensive experience in indigent defense, which has proved to be contentious in the confirmation process.

175 Comments

  3. Ethan's avatar

    I’m obviously hoping for someone like Bryant Yang but I think it’s more likely we’ll end up with someone like Ashfaq “Ron” Chowdhury, Christopher Dybwad, Emily Garcia Uhrig, Gia Kim, or Brianna Mircheff, all former federal defenders turned judges like Hwang.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Yea it will likely just be them. Rebecca Kanter’s nomination is dead for whatever reason. I wish they would just go ahead & pull her already.

      I’m sure Rick Scott is in no rush to turn in his blue slip for Detra Shaw-Wilder. I’m still upset they didn’t force her to be apart of the previous package deal when Rubio would have agreed to almost anything to get his backers new ones a federal judgeship. And of course I don’t see any blue slips being turned in anytime soon for Dana Jackson.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Ryan J's avatar

    Biden has been on a roll with appointing judges to the circuit court seats once held by Supreme Court justices. Out of the 14 most recent SCOTUS justices to have been circuit judges, 6 of those 14 seats are now held by Biden judges, with the potential for Biden judges to hold 8 of these seats.

    Anthony Kennedy’s seat (9th Cir.): Ana de Alba
    David Souter’s seat (1st. Cir.): Seth Aframe
    Clarence Thomas’s seat (D.C. Cir.): Brad Garcia
    Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat (D.C. Cir.): J. Michelle Childs
    Stephen Breyer’s seat (1st Cir.): Julie Rikelman
    KBJ’s seat (D.C. Cir.): Florence Pan

    Samuel Alito’s seat (3rd Cir.): vacant
    John Paul Stevens’s seat (7th Cir.): Ilana Rovner

    Out of the other 6 circuit court seats, 3 (Roberts, Scalia, Sotomayor) are now held by Obama judges. Only the 3 Trump justices’ seats are held by GOP appointees, having been backfilled with new Trump judges.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      For nerds who really want to understand how Biden has been so successful with these particular seats:

      Stevens (Ford) – H. Wood (Ford) – Rovner (GHW Bush) – vacating
      Kennedy (Ford) – Rymer (GHW Bush) – Watford (Obama) – de Alba (Biden)
      Souter (GHW Bush) – Stahl (GHW Bush) – Howard (GW Bush) – Aframe (Biden)
      Thomas (GHW Bush) – Rogers (Clinton) – Garcia (Biden)
      RBG (Carter) – Tatel (Clinton) – Childs (Biden)
      Breyer (Carter) – Lynch (Clinton) – Rikelman (Biden)
      Alito (GW Bush) – Greenaway (Obama) – vacant
      KBJ (Biden) – Pan (Biden)

      3 additional Obama judge-held seats:

      Scalia (Reagan) – Sentelle (Reagan) – Wilkins (Obama)
      Roberts (GW Bush) – Millett (Obama)
      Sotomayor (Clinton) – Lohier (Obama)

      Out of these 11 seats, 4 of them have remained in Dem hands. The other 7 have gone to Dems in a mixture of luck and Dem usage of procedural hurdles during pre-Trump GOP presidencies.

      Stevens’s seat: Rovner ended up being liberal like her second predecessor
      Scalia’s seat: Sentelle went senior on his 70th birthday
      Kennedy’s seat: Rymer died during Obama’s presidency
      Souter’s seat: Howard was willing to let Biden pick his successor
      Thomas’s seat: Dem Senate held it open
      Roberts’s seat: probably involved fighting and wasn’t filled until Harry Reid took down the filibuster for judges
      Alito’s seat: presumably Frank Lautenberg & Bob Menendez used blue slips to hold it open. Both NJ senators tried unsuccessfully to filibuster Alito.

      Trump was able to backfill the 3 seats held by Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, & Barrett because the GOP destroyed all the procedural hurdles for circuit judges.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        GREAT info & research @Ryan J. I’m definitely a judicial nerd so I enjoyed the read.

        It’s amazing how different the judiciary process was decades ago. Looking at Thomas seat not getting filled form October 1991 though the rest of Bush Sr. term, to allowing Clinton to fill it & now Biden with Bradley Garcia simply wouldn’t happen in today’s world if Republicans had control of the senate. One can only hop ethe same eventually happen with his seat on the SCOTUS with time.

        Liked by 2 people

  7. tsb1991's avatar

    Cloture invoked on Martinez. Tina Smith came out to update the Senate schedule, the confirmation vote will be at 11:30 AM tomorrow, and the Senate will vote on that CRA resolution tonight. Hopefully the slate of nominations being voted on this night get taken care of tomorrow (Martinez, Coggins, the Pentagon nominee) and clear up Thursday, and we get cloture on some nomination for the Thursday afternoon vote.

    Liked by 1 person

    • star0garnet's avatar

      So tomorrow we’ll have Biden’s 200th Article III confirmation, and 196th separate appointee. Biden needs 34 and 33 more respectively to tie Trump. After Martinez, there will be 38 vacancies requiring no GOP blue slips beyond Collins, including Maldonado. So Biden’s prospective totals are 238 and 233, beating Trump’s by four each. And it would be surprising if there are zero additional vacancies. Trump got his 200th confirmation on June 18, 2020.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. Zack's avatar

    On a different note, IF Biden wins again and we keep the Senate, I don’t forsee any more Republican retirements beyond Kent Jordan.
    Any flips we’ll see will be from the few remaining Reagan/George Sr judges leaving feet first.
    Also would expect to see a few more Clinton/Obama judges taking senior status as well.
    Have to wait and see.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Joe's avatar

      I think if Dems continue to control the senate we will see a lot of Obama retirements as those early appointments start to become eligible.

      if Biden wins but has a GOP senate then there might actually be an uptick in Reagan/Bush/Bush retirements because they know any replacement will likely be a centrist confirmed as part of a package deal.

      Liked by 3 people

      • star0garnet's avatar

        I agree that a GOP senate under Biden would likely result in some conservative retirements. I think the scenario for the most liberal judicial in 2029 is a GOP senate under Biden that flips in the midterm. But it would probably be only a marginal difference compared to holding the senate through his entire term. I do, however, expect some conservative judges have banked on Biden being a one-termer, and won’t be willing to serve another full term regardless. A breakdown of when current Art. III judges (who haven’t announced their retirement) have/will qualify for senior status, by presidential term:

        SCOTUS:
        2013-2017: 2 (1 GHW Bush, 1 GW Bush)
        2017-2021: 2 (1 GW Bush, 1 Obama)
        2021-2025: —
        2025-2029: 1 (1 Obama)
        2029-2033: 2 (2 Trump)
        2033-2037: 1 (1 Biden)
        2037-2041: 1 (1 Trump)

        Circuit:
        1993-1997: 1 (1 Reagan)
        1997-2001: —
        2001-2005: 1 (1 GHW Bush)
        2005-2009: 2 (2 GHW Bush)
        2009-2013: 5 (2 Reagan, 1 GHW Bush, 2 Clinton)
        2013-2017: 9 (2 Reagan, 4 Clinton, 3 GW Bush)
        2017-2021: 11 (3 Clinton, 8 GW Bush)
        2021-2025: 8 (4 GW Bush, 3 Obama, 1 Trump)
        2025-2029: 25 (7 GW Bush, 16 Obama, 2 Trump)
        2029-2033: 27 (3 GW Bush, 9 Obama, 13 Trump, 2 Biden)
        2033-2037: 28 (1 GW Bush, 4 Obama, 11 Trump, 12 Biden)
        2037-2041: 27 (1 Obama, 13 Trump, 13 Biden)
        2041-2045: 19 (10 Trump, 9 Biden)
        2045-2049: 6 (3 Trump, 3 Biden)
        2049-2053: 1 (1 Biden)

        District+IT:
        2001-2005: 1 (1 Reagan)
        2005-2009: 4 (2 Reagan, 1 GHW Bush, 1 Clinton)
        2009-2013: 13 (2 Reagan, 1 GHW Bush, 8 Clinton, 2 GW Bush)
        2013-2017: 8 (1 Reagan, 2 GHW Bush, 3 Clinton, 2 GW Bush)
        2017-2021: 22 (1 GHW Bush, 3 Clinton, 18 GW Bush)
        2021-2025: 47 (1 Clinton, 23 GW Bush, 23 Obama)
        2025-2029: 110 (25 GW Bush, 75 Obama, 10 Trump)
        2029-2033: 124 (13 GW Bush, 52 Obama, 52 Trump, 7 Biden)
        2033-2037: 130 (30 Obama, 54 Trump, 46 Biden)
        2037-2041: 65 (7 Obama, 19 Trump, 39 Biden)
        2041-2045: 57 (25 Trump, 32 Biden)
        2045-2049: 26 (9 Trump, 17 Biden)
        2049-2053: 5 (2 Trump, 3 Biden)

        Liked by 1 person

  10. tsb1991's avatar

    Hassan wrapped up. Martinez and Coggins will both be confirmed tomorrow, along with cloture on the Air Force nominee. After the two of them are confirmed we’ll be up to nine confirmed district court judges set to fill vacancies at later dates (the closest vacancy being filled would be Lanham on June 1). Surprised Schumer didn’t come out to send out cloture motions given that it sounded like he’d file cloture on the border bill, unless some other agreement was reached.

    The SJC hasn’t updated their site yet with the nominees at tomorrow’s hearing, but there’s five nominees some people here have in mind that will appear. There’s also the possibility of new nominees tomorrow, if not, Thursday is a possibility too.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I think we also have to remember sooner than later we are going to probably be disappointed in regard to a new batch. By my count, we are down to 14 vacancies without a nominee that do not require a Republican blue slip. One of those is for the NDGA that was just announced last week.

      Even if we add another circuit court or blue state district court vacancy, that’s only 3 new batches to fill 3 full SJC hearing worth of nominees we can expect. If we got 3 more batches without missing a slot, that would take us through August. We really need at least 5, preferably 10 more red or purple state district court nominees to not be disappointed by missing a batch between now & Election Day.

      I was hoping we could get 3 North Carolina nominees, but the way Tillis was sounding a couple weeks ago, that’s not too likely now. There’s still a chance for the 3 remaining MDFL vacancies depending on how Rubio & Scott feel about Embry Kidd. Louisianna (3), Indiana (1) & Kansas (1) all have signed off on circuit court nominees so perhaps we can some nominees from there. I intentionally left the WDTN (1) & EDWI (1) off the list because I just don’t buy Blackburn, Haggerty & Johnson working in good faith despite a circuit court vacancy & two nominees recommended, respectively.

      Like

  11. Mitch's avatar

    About the Detra Shaw-Wilder nomination. I have a hypothesis. Rick Scott is negotiating with the White House regarding two vacancies on the Middle District Court of Florida. He is pushing for a Republican in the package who is unacceptable to the White House. So he’s holding the Shaw-Wilder nomination until the White House relents. It’s another game of Confirmation Chicken. Shaw-Wilder alrady went through this before, when Marco Rubio wanted Marckeezy Lapointe for the vacancy.

    Lost in all these maneuverings is Shaw-Wilder herself. She’s a qualified corporate lawyer who’s well-regarded in the Miami business community and legal community. No one I know of has any problem with her.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      @Mitch

      I completely agree with everything you said. That’s why I was so adamant about getting Detra Shaw-Wilder in with the other 4 Florida nominees. Once Leibowitz was confirmed, all leverage was lost. Rubio would have done all he could to convince Scott to go through with the deal pre-Leibowitz.

      Like

      • Frank's avatar

        I don’t think the FL senators would’ve accepted another Democrat as part of a package deal, honestly. Even with the connection between Rubio and Leibowitz, there was a reason that deal wasn’t done under Trump, and no Republican is going to take a 4 for 1 deal with a Democratic president on judicial nominees from their home state. Even if Rubio would’ve been okay with it, I seriously doubt Scott would’ve signed off on it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Mitch's avatar

        The thing is, if I’m right, than Rick Scott is still willing to consent to Shaw-Wilder’s nomination. The White House just has to sign off on whoever Scott is advocating. IMHO, that would be someone who Scott had appointed to something while he was Governor.

        I still think that Detra Shaw-Wilder still could be confirmed. She’s not dead in the water like a few other nominees. It’s just going to take some more negotiating and some kind of concession.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. rob's avatar

    Michelle Williams Court answer to the question about her process of being nominated is fascinating as it says she was contacted by then Senator Harris staff in November 2020 to enquire if she was interested in a applying for a judgeship.

    Amazing to think 3 and half years later VP Harris is still influencing judicial picks.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Gavi's avatar

    From her SJC questionnaire, we finally got the answer on who recommended Netburn. As we assumed, Schumer.

    Netburn first interviewed for a judgeship in 2021. She could have easily gotten Dale Ho’s seat! Thank goodness she didn’t.

    Hers is a long process. She finally interviewed with Schumer in March 2023 and was told that he’d recommend her a full year later in March 2024.

    Then it took two months for Biden to announce her as a nominee, which is pretty standard.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Joe's avatar

    Anyone seen news on potential nominees this morning? I guess technically a batch could come tomorrow, but I should would like to get one today and avoid the suspense.

    Personally, I am keeping my fingers crossed for a 1st circuit nomination as well as some of the EDPA nominees. I think Vermont and Minnesota should be ready too.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      With only 14 vacancies that do not require a Republican blue slip, this may simply be the week we get disappointed & miss a batch. I hope not but it’s bound to happen sooner or later with so few vacancies in this category. We only have 7 vacancies for red state district court seats that have a circuit court vacancy as well. Hopefully we can squeeze out at least five more red state district court nominees but I’m getting myself ready to be disappointed soon, but hopefully not this week.

      Like

    • Dequan's avatar

      Great article @Ben. Tillis repeated his comments about the administration trying to jam him on the nominee they wanted for the 4th circuit that he said at the last SJC executive meeting. I’m happy the administration countered that by saying they offered 4 names & reviewed 4 names Tillis & Budd recommended.

      The article makes it sound as though a nominee for the 4th has been selected & it’s one of the 4 the administration recommended. That’s good news.

      The comments from Senator Kennedy are mixed. It sounds like he is aware the administration wanted to break Trump’s one term record. He also made it seem as though they are still having on going discussions on consensus nominees so it’s still possible for Louisiana’s 3 vacancies to get nominees. The last two paragraphs in the article was really good to read.

      Like

    • Hank's avatar

      Interesting news on the CA4 vacancy – we rarely get this kind of information about the process, especially before the nominee’s SJQ is public. Hopefully it means we’ll see a nominee soon, as that confirmation will be more difficult without the NC blue slips. If it is Ryan Park, I’m sure the Republicans will all refuse to support him because he represented UNC in the affirmative action case in front of SCOTUS last term.

      I also wonder how bad the 4 candidates Tillis/Budd had recommended were – given that the WH is willing to sign off on white, male career prosecutors like Ritz and Kolar (as well as older, centrist nominees like Ramirez), I’m pleasantly surprised that they’re not going with one of the NC senators’ candidates. I would imagine those names must have been either Fed Soc members, 70 years old, or both.

      Lastly, the fact that Tillis/Budd at least offered some names makes it even clearer that Blackburn/Hagerty were stalling on the Gibbons vacancy (and are doing so now on the Stranch one). Notice how, unlike last time with McMullen, Blackburn couldn’t name someone she had recommended—or even say that she had put forth anyone at all.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. Gavi's avatar

    Thanks Ben. We discussed at length the Tillis revelation two weeks ago. What’s new, at least to me, is the bit about the district court vacancies in NC. He didn’t mention that before.

    Looks like the NC senators know how to negotiate/play hard ball on nominations. With the relationships Tillis has in the senate, I’m kinda worried that the eventual CA4 nominee will be at best another Irma Ramirez, or more likely, worse. Especially since they’ve already successfully preemptively sunk the WH first pick.

    Damn, if only Dems were this good at negotiations with Republican WHs. This might be giving too much credit to the senators, but with all things considered, they hold a lot of the cards.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Dequan's avatar

    So much for a quiet SJC hearing. We have a full on shouting match going on. Senator Butler (Sitting in for Durbin as temporary Chair) vs. both Cruz & Kennedy shouting across the room at each other. I didn’t think we would see anywhere near this much fireworks today… WOW

    Like

  20. Dequan's avatar

    Here is my recap from todays SJC hearing…

    Durbin started by talking about the senate confirming President Biden’s 200th federal judge later today. 

    Senator King introduced Stacey Neumann. He made a funny joke by saying he was here to explain why she’s qualified for this seat. He said she’s from Maine, then pretended to get up & leave which caused the room to laugh. 

    Senator Graham talked about the immigration bill. He said the vote is only being held to try & help the Democrats & he doesn’t think it will work. This led to a back & forth between him & Durbin. Once it ended, Durbin read a statement from Schumer on his recommendation for the SDNY nominee. 

    Senator Butler then spoke about the three California nominees. Senator Padilla followed doing the same. 

    Durbin then went into asking the nominees questions without giving them time to introduce themselves & their families. I think that’s the first time I’ve ever seen that. His staff quickly reminded him & he gave the nominees a chance to introduce themselves as normal. 

    Valenzuela Dixon answered a question about a lawsuit from MALDEF that she benefitted from. She was bused because of a discrimination lawsuit won by the organization.

    Graham questioned Valenzuela Dixon about if she worked with MALDEF when they opposed GW Bush nominee Miguel Estrada’s nomination to the DC circuit. He then questioned her about some of her work on immigration cases. He asked her about the positions MALDEF has taken & she reminded him she hasn’t worked with them in 13 years. He then asked her if she thinks Israel is occupying Palestine. Graham then asked Netburn about a rape & transgender case she ruled on. 

    Senator Hirono then spoke about the diversity of the near 200 federal judges the senate has confirmed under Biden. She then asked her normal two questions, then asked Hwang about her South Korean background. She then spoke to Valenzuela Dixon about her immigrant background. She then spoke to Court about diversity in the court. 

    Senator Lee followed up with Netburn on the rape/transgender case mentioned earlier. Lee passionately demanded Netburn explain why she ruled a 6 foot 2 inch biological male could be transferred to a female prison because he was transgender. He then asked Valenzuela Dixon about a voter ID case. 

    Senator Butler asked the nominees questions next. 

    Senator Kennedy asked Court about the Full faith & credit clause, to which she answered satisfactory. She then asked Netburn about the Brennan Center & Reproductive work. He then asked her if she is a political activist which she said she was not. He then asked her about the rape & transgender case from earlier where she transferred the biological male to a female prison. He then accused Netburn of being a political activist once again. 

    Senator Cruz then continued with questioning Sarah Netburn on the same transgender case. He passionately accused Netburn of putting a serial rapist in a female prison. Cruz ended saying he thinks she is a radical & has business being a judge. Senator Butler (Who took over for Durbin as temporary chair) allowed Netburn to finish her answer. Then a SCREAMING match started between Senator Cruz & Kennedy with Senator Butler. Cruz yelled over Butler. Butler then gave the floor to Senator Padilla & both Cruz & Kennedy continued screaming while Padilla tried to talk. 

    Senator Kennedy interrupted in the middle of Padilla’s questioning with a Point of Order. He wanted a second round of questioning. Chair Butler ruled down the Point of Order. Kennedy then appealed the ruling if the chair & wanted a roll call vote. Butler then said no. Cruz then interjected. Butler then tried to give the floor back to Padilla. Kennedy & Cruz continued to talk & Kennedy then accused Netburn of perjury. Hirono then interjected & said the way Netburn will be “A damn good judge”. Butler then threatened to adjourn the hearing if Cruz & Kennedy continued to talk when they do not have the floor. Padilla apologized to the nominees for the decorum of his colleagues. Butler then adjourned. 

    Liked by 3 people

  21. Joe's avatar

    Thanks for the write up, Dequan as always.

    As for a batch this week, I’m wondering if maybe the NC pick will come down today. Politico and other news outlets normally don’t run stories like that until the day of the nomination. With Ritz, that package came late in the day too, so there’s still hope.

    I know running out of vacancies is likely to become reality soon, but even just a small batch of 3-4 nominees would help keep SJC moving at a consistent clip.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. tsb1991's avatar

    The WH Counsel at the end of the article mentioned getting all of the hearing slots filled before the August break. That would include two July hearings, the question is whether that would include a second hearing in June. At this point if that is the case we’d need something end-of-day or tomorrow.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. tsb1991's avatar

    While I’m refreshing the White House website throughout the day, they did release a statement about the confirmation of the 200th judge. Unless Schumer said something prior to the Martinez vote, nothing was said immediately after, unless they wanted to get right to the cloture vote for Coggins.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      While I still doubt Biden will pass 234, looking at the numbers he has a realistic chance. In addition to the 200 confirmed judges, there are currently 24 judges pending. Now of course that includes Mangi, Kanter & Jackson who are all unlikely to be confirmed. Even at 224 or 221 minus those three, there are still 14 pending vacancies without a nominee that don’t require a Republican blue slip. So so 221 plus those 14 would get Biden exactly to 235 to pass Trump. And that’s not including any unexpected vacancies in the next month or so that hopefully wouldn’t require a Republican blue slip. It’s possible

      Like

      • Mike's avatar

        I’m very happy to admit how wrong I was and that it’s definitely possible but senate Dems need to keep pushing through these easy district votes.

        I’m guessing and hoping the only reason they’re wasting tomorrow on the border vote instead of confirming 2 more judges is because they don’t have the votes for any current pending nominees.

        Liked by 1 person

      • tsb1991's avatar

        The only other federal judge that we know wouldn’t be party-line right now would be Meriweather to Federal Claims. They could also start pushing for the local DC judges while Menendez is out. We’ll see what cloture motions Schumer sets up tomorrow before they skip town for a week.

        The only pending nominee I can picture not being a party-line is Maldonado. Attendance has looked a bit flaky this week as well, but I can’t imagine the issues that were brought up in her hearing would cause her to lose Collins/Murkowski/Manchin, especially when they supported Aframe. You’d know think Maldonado would be a priority to confirm given that A) It’s to Durbin’s appeals court and Illinois judges have typically been fast-tracked and B) The faster she gets confirmed, the faster the SJC can get onto processing Perry.

        On another note related today, during the Coggins vote, I saw Schumer walk up to Butler who’s presiding on the vote for a talk. I wonder how much support she’s gotten from her colleagues after having to preside over the bleep-show that was the hearing today (another thought of that, pretty funny watching two Republican men just outright melt down over a panel of all-women, and they say women are too emotional to be put into positions of power…). Schumer then talked to Durbin right after on the floor so that may be of note. I’d vote for Netburn at this point solely out of spite lol

        And on the subject of Cruz, it’s hilarious how he’s trying to brand himself as this bipartisan dealmaker like he’s the Orrin Hatch to Ted Kennedy or something for his re-election, given that he shut down the government in his first full year as a Senator, was a January 6 ally to Trump, and supports personhood abortion measures. He’ll win re-election regardless since he’s still insulated by the partisan lean of Texas, but he probably senses the state shifting under his feet.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        @tbs1991

        I completely agree. I wasn’t a huge Netburn fan since there were so many younger & more progressive options for the SDNY. But after today’s hearing, I am all in to get her confirmed. The shear image of Kennedy & Cruz shouting down the senate’s only Black woman for doing virtually the same thing Durbin has done many times in the past got me upset to be honest.

        I remember early in senator Ossoff term when he temporarily took over for Durbin at a hearing, Cruz did something similar. Ossoff tried to cut Cruz off when he went past his time by banging his gavel & Cruz had a snide response saying he can see the new senator has a gavel & knows how to bang it on the table. I know this time next year we should have a senate without Manchin, Sinema & Menendez but what I wouldn’t give to add Cruz to that list.

        Like

  24. Ryan J's avatar

    Click to access 23-35580.pdf

    Today, the 9th circuit (Miller, joined by Wardlaw, W. Fletcher) affirmed Washington’s obligation to provide special education to disabled 21 year olds. The 9th circuit reversed Lauren King, who ruled for the state of Washington. This suggests that King might be more conservative than expected, given that she ruled against disability rights and a 9th circuit panel that included a Trump judge reversed her.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Dequan's avatar

    Lauren King was definitely the hardest for me to judge out of the 7 Biden judges on the WDWA. I figured John Chun might be the most conservative out of the 7 but King would either be second or first. The other 5 all appear to be progressive.

    I actually hope she does tilt the furthest to the right out of the 7. If judge Gould leaves the bench while a Democrat is President & still control the senate, I could see the desire to nominate her to the 9th. If she tilts a little to the right, that only elevates the chances of Jamal Whitehead & Tiffany Cartwright.

    Like

  26. Dequan's avatar

    I’m reading through the Politico newsletter from yesterday. There is a piece titled “DURBIN’S JUDICIAL UPDATE”. Here’s a couple of quotes from Durbin from the article…

    “It’s tough,” Durbin said, of catching Trump’s 234 federal judicial confirmations while in office.

    But Durbin vowed that “yes, definitely” Democrats would keep an aggressive clip of confirmations regardless of the November election results. It’s a dilemma that’s been weighing on the White House and Democratic senators as they confront a tough Senate map this fall and the possible loss of chamber control.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Here’s a fresh new article on Biden’s 200th judge. It was the last paragraph however that was most interesting regarding a possible Sotomayor retirement. This is the first time I’m reading these comments from her. There may still be hope, albeit slight hope that she may retire sooner rather than later.

      (https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/biden-reaches-200-judge-mark-as-time-short-to-fill-circuit-seats?source=newsletter&item=read-text&region=digest&login=blaw)

      Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        And i hope Biden would announce his intent to backfill either Mryna Perez or Brad Garcia so they can be processed immediately after the SCOTUS confirmation. No way Republicans would fill a seat on the 2nd or DC circuit if Biden wins but they take the senate.

        Like

      • tsb1991's avatar

        The ideal Sotomayor retirement scenario for me would be to bring the Senate back in for a week in October and hold a confirmation vote then. If a hearing slot has to be used up in September for a Sotomayor replacement then have a hearing in October to make up for it (same as to what happened in October 2022). Democrats could simply say they’re doing exactly what Republicans did in October of 2020 to fill a SCOTUS vacancy on the eve of an election.

        Who’s the most viable replacement? Prelogar? Obviously a huge risk in elevating any appeals court nominee to SCOTUS this late in the season.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I think both Elizabeth Prelogar & Alison Nathan would be amongst the front runners for any non Sotomayor & Roberts vacancy. I simply see almost zero chance of Biden replacing Sotomayor with a non Hispanic. Like I would say zero percent, but I’m leaving it as less than 1% but really it’s zero chance.

        Like

      • Joe's avatar

        TSB, my pick would be Myrna Perez. She has the progressive credentials and has 3 years of appellate experience now too. At age 50, she’s prime for elevation too.

        A possible dark horse might be someone like Gabriel Sanchez. In my opinion Brad Garcia is too young and inexperienced. If a vacancy occurred late in a second Biden term then maybe he could come into play.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Oh that was @Joe, not me that made that statement. I know it’s hard to tell who’s saying what depending on if you are reading on your phone versus a computer. But I have absolutely no problem with Myrna Perez if she was picked. I disagree with the other comment Brad Garcia is too young & inexperienced. But I do agree Gabriel Sanchez could be a dark horse pick, particularly being from VP Harris home state. I just don’t see him ultimately being picked.

        As for North Carolina, if the article from today is correct, I doubt we will see any of the 3 vacancies filled this year. It looks like the WH will go with one of their four candidates instead of Tillis. So he & Budd will be in no mood to turn in blue slips until after the election.

        Like

  27. star0garnet's avatar

    Interesting how lopsided turnout can be in the senate; this vote started 12-27, and ended on a 44-11 run. I know sometimes its due to caucus meetings and the like, and sometimes there’s even an effort made by opponents to achieve this, but it’s remarkable how unpredictive early votes can be.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Mitch's avatar

    I can see David Keesler as part of a package of judges in North Carolina, perhaps as a Circuit Court nominee. Also, Senator Thom Tillis has worked in a bipartisan manner in the past.

    Any package would have to include one Republican for District Judge. I think it’s still doable.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Tillis has worked in a bipartisan matter, but we don’t know how unreasonable Budd is. Idk how exactly Budd plays into this, but it comes down to 2 possibilities. 1) Tillis is refusing to support anyone who Budd opposes, or 2) Biden realizes that Budd isn’t ever going to allow reasonable district court nominees and so decided to shove a nominee down Budd’s throat, making Tillis this angry because he’s being punished for something that is Budd’s fault

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I can’t imagine this administration saying no to a deal with less than six months before the election that would get an acceptable circuit court nominee for the 4th & filling all three district court vacancies. My guess is the four recommendations for the 4th Tillis gave the WH were all unacceptable They probably were some combination of old, not a person of color & not particularly progressive.

        Had Till taken the approach that was taken in Indiana, Kansas & Texas, the WH would have almost surely had agreed. I think Doris Pryor is the standard example. She was a young, Black woman who was a former federal defender. She wasn’t extremely progressive but too good for the WH to pass up a guaranteed confirmation with two home stat Republicans support. Tillis probably gave Biden a list of four Irma Ramirez’s that were Caucasian.

        Liked by 1 person

  31. tsb1991's avatar

    Two votes set up tomorrow in the Senate, to confirm the Air Force nominee and a vote on the border bill. Only real interesting things tomorrow are if we do get a last-minute batch of nominees and what cloture motions are sent for when the Senate gets back from its break. Any judiciary-related cloture motions would probably be Meriweather or some local DC judges at this point.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      What is going on with the Menedez trial? Any update as to how much longer it will take? Hopefully the state of New Jersey has a pair of golden handcuffs to put around his wrist just like the gold bars he had in his closet. At the very least get the trail over with so we can get on with replacing him if he’s found guilty or let him come back to work so we can start the countdown to when New Jersey finally sends him packing next January.

      Like

  34. Mitch's avatar

    Thanks to insomnia, I just research on the transgender prisoner case Sarah Netburn presided over. The inmate is William McClain, who goes by July Justine Shelby. Shelby is a 6′ 2″ registered sex offender who previously served 18 years for molesting a 9 y/o boy and forcing himself on an 17 y/o girl. He also sent child pornography to other sex offenders.

    John Kennedy stated, “What planet did you parachute in from? You sent him to a women’s prison with this kind of record?”

    I can see this nominee going the way of Marian Gaston.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I remember people on this blog saying Dale Ho wasn’t going to get confirmed. I’ll say the same thing now that I said then. A nominee recommended by the senate majority leader is almost surely going to be confirmed come Hell or high water. I just believe any nominee from New York, Delaware & probably Illinois will get confirmed when those are the home states of the senate majority leader, the President & the judiciary chairman.

      Like

    • Hank's avatar

      Mitch, stop with the bigotry – “goes by”? The person is transgender, so your use of “he” already shows that you’re hardly unbiased about this case.

      Also, how convenient of you to leave out the fact that, as Netburn mentioned, there has been no record of sexual or physical violence by the prisoner since she was incarcerated. Furthermore, you overlook the fact that (1) Netburn didn’t transfer the prisoner to a juvenile/children’s facility, and (2) senator Foghorn Leghorn couldn’t name a single woman in the new prison that had been harmed by the prisoner since Netburn approved the transfer.

      Given that Netburn is not Muslim and this transfer didn’t actually cause anyone any harm, even the horrible, cowardly excuse of a human being known as Jacky Rosen will have a harder time justifying her opposition to Netburn. I also agree with Dequan that one of Schumer’s nominees is unlikely to be tanked.

      Liked by 3 people

  36. aangren's avatar

    Netburn will withdraw and not be confirmed because of the democrats cowardice she is marian gaston 2.0 what irks me so bad is that a no good charlatan and sales man like ted cruz basically forced biden and scolded him to pick a 59 year old centrist judge nearly a decade younger than her predecessor as a circuit court. I predict the same thing for the NC vacancy, the rule of the day will be whatever Tillis and BUD agree to and biden will acquiese, at this point nearly all polls show biden losing in November in the electoral college, if jon ralston the guru of nevada politics say he is in trouble in nevada a blue state, its over.

    When you are nominating people like kolar and kevin ritz another white prosecutor for appellate seats instead of holly thomas and myrna perez this whole thing has turn to a joke. In a sane world where goons like lawrence vandyke and kascmaryk where confirmed under trump the absolute cowardice of democrats to let marian gaston, edelman great nominees not to get confirmed its an absolute disgrace.

    Like

  38. keystone's avatar

    First off, good to see aangren back making predictions after he recently went off about how Seth Aframe would never be confirmed only to have Schumer file cloture on him a few hours later.

    Secondly, Marion Gaston is not the right comparison. Eumi Lee is, IMO, a better comparison here. Lee seemed like a fairly conventional pick on paper and the opposition against her also had to do with trans women in jails. This is the playbook they are using with Netburn. Lee’s confirmation took a while but she ultimately got confirmed. There is still plenty of time between now and the end of the term to get a large number of party line nominees confirmed. Since Netburn a Schumer nominee, I have to guess she will get some sort of preferential treatment with regards to getting a vote scheduled.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Gavi's avatar

      I agree that she’ll get confirmed, eventually. But I disagree on your last guess. NY nominees don’t usually get “preferential treatment with regards to getting a vote scheduled.” It’s usually the opposite, especially when Republicans have made the nominee out to be controversial.

      This is why I would have preferred a proven progressive for that seat (my local court). If Dale Ho and Sara Netburn are getting the same treatment, including wait time for confirmation, what exactly is the advantage of nominating Netburn?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Frank's avatar

        It took Dale Ho almost 2 years to be confirmed. No way Netburn will need that amount of time. As a court that chronically has judicial emergencies, it is important to fill open seats quickly on the S.D.N.Y. as to best handle the heavy workload, and the primary way to do that is to nominate less controversial nominees, who aren’t liberal or conservative hacks.

        Liked by 1 person

  42. Dequan's avatar

    What great news to wake up to. I was really worried this would be the week we finally miss a batch & would be disappointed. Instead we get our 50rh batch with two circuit court nominees. I can’t remember the last time that’s happened. I figured the 6th would be a former law clerk to the judge they are replacing similar to Ritz. Really really good news. And in Vermont we get a long time public defender who’s only 53. All around great news.

    Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        I had her husband as third on my list or probables after Darcie McElwee. We need more judges with an environmental protection background so that’s good news.

        Karla Campbell is a rockstar pick. I’m giving her a HIGH A, possibly an A+. Shes born c. 1980, a former board member, American Constitution Society & even speaks Spanish. And she’s not a sitting judge so we don’t have to worry about any backfill issues in ruby red Tennessee.

        As for @aangren, welcome back. I see you are still as entertaining, even at the expense of being accurate, as ever. Going off your previous predictions we wouldn’t get nominees for the 7th or 10th unless they were Republicans (We got Kolar & Frederico) & your prediction Seth Aframe would never be confirmed, I guess Netburn is almost a slam dunk to get confirmed… Haaaaaa

        Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      I was also skeptical about Julia Lipez given that she’s a state-cour trial judge right now, so mea culpa. Her background is very conventional/without anything particularly liberal – I’m not seeing anything indicating that she has experience in environmental law? Nevertheless, I’m surprised that Collins signed off on her given that she’s only 40-something.

      Interesting that she’s nominated to the seat that her father, Kermit Lipez, used to hold (before Kayatta). Given how small and insular Maine’s legal community is, I’m sure that being well-connected helped Lipez clinch the nomination. I also wonder if Kermit Lipez (who is both a great judge and pretty liberal) agreed behind the scenes to fully retire/take inactive senior status upon the confirmation of his daughter. He’s not required to (Betty Fletcher was a senior judge with a full caseload until her death, even after her son William Fletcher was confirmed to CA9), but he’s 82 and the prospect of getting a liberal judge off the bench may have sweetened the deal for Collins.

      I’m happy we’re getting nominations this week (I thought we wouldn’t), and it’s even better that we’ve got a nominee to another circuit seat. At this point, it’s only the CA4 (NC), CA6 (TN), and CA3 (DE & possibly NJ) that lack nominees? I’m cautiously optimistic that Biden can fill all of those (though we’ll have to see about CA3 given the Mangi debacle and Jordan going senior so late).

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        And we already know the WH has picked one of their four recommendations for the 4th. They did not go with one of the four Tillis recommended according to the argument from yesterday.

        I expect a nominee for the 3rd quickly. And then confirmation quickly as Delaware has the quickest time from announced to confirmation of any of the 50 states save Arizona.

        We will have to see what the plan is for Mangi. That’s truly the wild card but I’m sure the administration has a plan.

        Like

      • Ethan's avatar

        @Hank, I was wondering the same thing about Kermit Lipez. The First Circuit’s case load is much lighter than the Ninth Circuit’s so it’s very possible he’ll take inactive senior status. Now if only Carl Stewart’s daughter Karelia Stewart (a state judge in Louisiana) is nominated for a federal judgeship.

        Like

  45. keystone's avatar

    “The announcement is part of Biden’s 50th round of nominees for positions on the federal judiciary, along with another circuit court and two district court nominations. “

    … so there should be another district nom out there.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hank's avatar

      Yep, she seems like a younger Stranch in terms of her experience in labor law/ERISA. I’d be surprised if she rules any differently than Stranch.

      Blackburn is 100% going to lose it – doesn’t seem like Campbell has done much criminal defense work (and she wasn’t a prosecutor), so it’ll be hard to hit her as weak on crime (though I’m sure they’ll try). If the Republicans’ best attack is that she represented unions/workers, I doubt that’ll resonate with any Dems other than Manchin. Rosen and Cortez Masto would have a hard time opposing a union lawyer when they depend on the unions in Nevada to turn out votes.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      The 50th batch is stellar & was worth the wait. I saw Catherine Henry was born c. 1969 so I was hoping we would get younger nominees from a blue state like Pennsylvania. But she’s a long time federal defender & was a staff attorney at the Feminist Majority Foundation for a couple years. So she definitely gets a high grade in my book, probably an A.

      Like

    • Aiden's avatar

      Agree, with the sentiment. You can definitely see these nominations been in line with what we have heard from republican senators and those working close in judicial appointments. Biden has definitely been pushing for decent nominees despite all the constraints! Great job with this lot!

      Liked by 2 people

  50. Aiden's avatar

    EDPA nominee has been in public Defense for nearly her entire career! 28 years and did a don’t at a feminist organisation!
    This is an amazing pick credentials wise. Hopefully all the other nominees for Pennsylvania can be this good and hopefully some are younger!

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a reply to Aiden Cancel reply