Judge Meredith Vacca – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York

After the nomination of Rochester attorney Colleen Holland stalled, the White House has put forward the nomination of Monroe County Court Judge Meredith Vacca to fill this vacancy on the Western District of New York.

Background

Born in Busan, South Korea in 1980, Vacca received a Bachelor of Arts from Colgate University in 1998 and went onto earn her J.D. from the University of Buffalo School of Law in 2005. Vacca then spent two years as an Associate at Hamberger & Weiss in Buffalo before joining the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office in Rochester.

In 2020, Vacca was elected to the Monroe County Count, and currently serves in that role as well as an Acting Supreme Court Justice.

History of the Seat

Vacca has been nominated to a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. This seat opened on April 1, 2023, when Judge Frank Geraci moved to senior status. President Biden previously nominated Rochester attorney Colleen Holland to fill this vacancy. However, Holland never received a hearing and ultimately withdrew her nomination.

Legal Experience

Vacca started her legal career at Hamberger & Weiss in Buffalo, where she worked primarily in workers compensation defense. She left this position after around two years to become a prosecutor in Rochester.

From 2007 to 2020, Vacca worked as a prosecutor working on criminal matters. Throughout her time with the office, Vacca tried approximately 30 jury and bench trials. One of those trials was in the prosecution of Robert Norry, who was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison for fatally stabbing his girlfriend. See Will Cleveland, Man Sentenced in Brutal Fatal Stabbing of Girlfriend Inside Caroline Street Apartment, Democrat & Chronicle, May 30, 2019, https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2019/05/30/robert-norry-guilty-murder-kelly-omay-rochester-caroline-street/1289792001/. Vacca also worked on the prosecution of Clayton Whittemore, who was convicted of beating his girlfriend to death in her dorm room. See Meaghan McDermott, Clayton Whittemore Gets Max Sentence in Dorm Killing, Democrat & Chronicle, Aug. 5, 2014, https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2014/08/05/whittemore-sentenced-savage-beating-death-gf/13614259/.

Jurisprudence

Since her election in 2021, Vacca has served as a County Court Judge in Monroe County, New York. In this role, Vacca presides over felony criminal matters as well as appeals from the town, village, and city courts. Notably, Vacca presided over the guilty plea and sentencing of Jarrod Dozier, who plead guilty to shooting and killing Terry Howard. See Jennifer Lewke, Man Sentenced to 22 Years for Killing Rochester Father in Front of His Two Children, News 10, Jan. 30, 2024, https://www.whec.com/top-news/man-responsible-for-november-fatal-shooting-sentenced-to-22-years-in-prison/. Vacca sentenced Dozier to twenty two years in prison for the shooting. See id.

Most of Vacca’s decisions that have been appealed have been affirmed. See, e.g., People v. Rufus, 220 A.D.3d 1162 (N.Y. Sup. App. Div. 4th 2023) (affirming conviction for driving while intoxicated). However, in another notable decision, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, reversed Vacca’s ruling allowing a defendant to be charged with criminal trespass in the third degree as a lesser included offense of burglary in the third degree. See People v. Newman, 214 A.D.3d 1451 (N.Y. Sup. App. Div. 4th 2023). The Appellate Court found that, because criminal trespass includes the element that the building entered in fenced or enclosed, which is not an element of burglary, that the charge cannot be considered a lesser included offense. See id.

Since 2023, Vacca also serves as an Acting Supreme Court Justice (in New York, the Supreme Court is the trial court). This role has Vacca preside over certain civil matters.

Overall Assessment

Vacca’s nomination has already proceeded faster and farther than Holland’s, having reached a Judiciary Committee hearing. If prioritized, Senate Democrats should be able to confirm Vacca’s nomination before the end of the Congress.

68 Comments

    • She already had a hearing and John Kennedy accused her of being a partisan activist. He cited remarks she made during a radio interview in 2020. Vacca said, “: ‘We also need to recognize the effects of racism on our criminal justice system. Institutional racism impacts all of society. I think that is amplified in our criminal justice system.“

      Kennedy claimed that racism is in every society and questioned if she could be impartial if she thinks the legal system is deliberately racist.

      Democrats pointed out her record as prosecutors and judge, which seems to be traditional for a judicial nominee.

      I still expect her to be confirmed.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. A fresh new post from Harsh. A lot has happened in the past two weeks since the Embry Kidd article was posted. Here’s a recap;

    • For the second time in as many months, Mitch McConnell has publicly given Biden a suggestion as to who he should nominate to a circuit court seat in a blue state. First, he suggested Zahid Quraishi should be nominated instead off Adeel Mangi, claiming he would still be the first Muslim circuit court judge. Of course, he left out progressive groups were the ones most unhappy about his district court nomination. Last week McConnell was back at it again, suggesting Biden withdraw Nancy Maldanado for Mary M. Rowland. He praised her saying she would be a history making, progressive woman on the 7th & the only difference her & Maldanado is Rowland would actually be qualified. I’m sure the part about Rowland turning 63 by the time she would take her seat had nothing to do with his ringing endorsement… Lol
    • I was surprised to find out which 2nd circuit judge was the one that had the ethics complaint we were talking about months ago. David Lat’s reporting revealed some specific details as to the complaints. I would have bet it was one of the Trump judges but to find out it was actually a Biden judge, & one I wasn’t too thrilled about being elevated to the 2nd in the first place about, was even more disappointing. I wish the allegations came out prior to the nomination. Perhaps we could have gotten Justin Driver or Cristina Rodriguez instead. 
    • There was little surprise to see two more Republican senators add their name to the initial list oof 8, not to support any more Biden nominees. I expect the list to grow even more. I doubt we will see any more red state district court judges get confirmed before the election at this rate. 
    • I know some were upset with Governor Murphy’s pick for the New Jersey Supreme Court. I don’t understand why they don’t scrap that partisan balance thing. It’s only in two states & both Delaware & New Jersey have had Democrat governors for decades now. Still, all in all it was about as good of a pick as we could get with the tradition. He is an Independent & doesn’t seem to be MAGA whatsoever. Plus he is fairly old. 
    • I thought the last batch of nominees was terrific. I give Karla Campbell an (A), borderline A+… Jule Lipez (A-)… Mary Kay Lanthier (A-)… Catherine Henry (A), borderline A+. I only took a little off for her age. 
    • The SJC hearing last week was the most tame I’ve seen in quite some time. I think Embry Kidd did a fantastic job.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Nothing particularly surprising about Merriam not treating her law clerks well, unfortunately – being mean or unpleasant is common on both sides of the aisle (Kozinski was a Republican whereas Reinhardt was a Democrat, and they were both horrible bosses/people). If a person isn’t very patient/kind/understanding, then that’s certainly not going to improve when you give them life tenure.

      I also don’t think that this news coming out would have derailed her nomination. Given that the Dems have Amy Klobuchar, I doubt that allegations that Merriam was mean to her employees was going to tank her nomination—especially when she was campaign counsel to two CT senators. I agree that Rodriguez and Driver would’ve been more exciting nominees, but folks on here tend to forget how much getting a judicial nomination is about having powerful friends/backers (which I hate, but unfortunately that’s the reality we live in).

      Liked by 1 person

  6. With new nominees possible this week, what vacancies do you most want to see filled in this new batch? I definitely want the nominee for James Wynn’s vacancy (CA4-NC). This will be a tough confirmation so we might as well start the clock now and hope the nominee will be confirmed in the lame duck. It’s just over 6 months at this point, so hopefully the WH is ready again to nominate and say to hell with the NC senators.

    I also would love to see David Hurd off the NDNY once and for all, but I doubt we’ll see his replacement in this batch.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I’d love to see them nominate someone to fill Jordan’s seat on CA3 – I know it’s unlikely b/c he only announced a month ago, but Maldonado (the only other blue state circuit nominee recently) was nominated very quickly after Rovner announced her decision to take senior status. The DE nominees tend to be traditional corporate lawyers anyway, so it shouldn’t be that hard to find someone who shouldn’t be controversial on paper—likely Jennifer Hall on D. Del.

      That being said, I’m sure that the Republicans will oppose whoever simply because it’s flipping a Republican seat and Jordan doesn’t go senior until next year. In that case, they might as well put forth the nominee now to have more time to get her confirmed.

      The attacks on Maldonado being unqualified are ridiculous, as is anything that comes out of McConnell’s mouth – Durbin should be saying again and again that Maldonado has never been reversed. Ever. Which is more than can be said for the crazies that McConnell put on the bench.

      Liked by 2 people

      • This continued vacancy is wild. Has this been the longest vacancy in the Biden era? Or would that be the one Pocan was barred from filling in Wisconsin?

        Regardless, there’s now no blue slip issues for PA, so there shouldn’t be a vacancy that old. I wonder if they had a candidate who fell through late in the vetting process, forcing them to restart?

        Liked by 2 people

    • @Anthony Myrlados

      Welcome to the blog. I saw you comment for the first time on the last write up but I have a personal rule that I don’t comment on articles I write so I want to welcome you now. I actually went to your blog & enjoyed it. I tried to leave a comment. I’m not sure if it went through or not.

      @Gavi

      I expect a new batch this week. If Jordan gave Biden a heads up he was retiring then they possibly might already have a nominee vetted by now. I’m hoping for Christopher Howland there. My first two choices I think would have tougher confirmations so I doubt they will be picked. Alexander Mackler would be really good but his name showed up on Hunter Biden’s laptop. It was nothing incriminating but we all know Republicans would give Michael Dell a rough confirmation because the name Dell is on the cover of the laptop. My second favorite pick would have been Justice Christopher Griffiths but with the DUI he had recently before being confirmed, I would imagine he’s out.

      Since we know the WH has already selected somebody for the 4th, we could see that nominee this week. Ryan Park is my prohibited front runner for that seat. I am sure the WH wants one more AAPI circuit court judge by the end of the year. He would probably jump to the front of the list as a possible first AAPI SCOTUS Justice in a second term should he be confirmed. He’s straight out of central casting.

      As for who else I would like to see this week, there are several. I think the Minnesota nominee should be ready by now. I am hoping it will be one of the runner ups that didn’t get either of the two SCOT-MN seats last month. It’s time for all California vacancies to finally have a nominee so we could see any or all for the ND, CD & SD of California. To me, the biggest wild card is besides those three seats, does the WH finally pull Kanter’s nomination & we see a fourth California nominee.

      We could see one of the remaining EDPA vacancies get a nominee this week. Also the CDIL nominee should be ready as well. The biggest question there is will we get a nominee whose last name is Hawley or will we get a nominee who is from Senator Hawley’s home state of Missouri right across the river. I would hope out of the four names recommended, one of those two are the pick.

      Like

      • Yes, any vacancy in C.D. Cal. or E.D. Cal. is a judicial emergency.

        I may be biased as an OC resident, but the OC court seems super understaffed. With Carney gone, there are only 4 judges hearing cases on the court (Carter, Holcomb, Slaughter, & senior judge Selna). It would be nice to get that seat filled quickly or at least have Staton move back to OC.

        Liked by 2 people

  7. @Gavi

    The WI seat has been vacant since 2019, so it’s longer. That cursed SDCA seat that Gaston was up for and that Kanter is currently nominated for is also older.

    With regards to the EDPA seat, the PA senators have generally had lengthy processes to fill seats. When the Rufe seat first came up (due to her stepping down bc of her husband’s health), PA had Senators from both parties. PA had a lengthy list of open seats. They were able to agree on 4 noms (which worked out well since they had their 3-1 rule) and they left this seat open. After the midterms, Fetterman was elected and pretty quickly took leave for mental health issues. At that point, I think Casey decided to focus more on the MDPA seats that were open since they encompass his region of PA. When Fetterman came back, they announced that they were going to restart the whole application process for all remaining seats. This was in the fall of last year. At the time, I read it as Fetterman wanting to be more involved in the process, but IDK.

    Not sure that I really answered the questions, but that’s how I remember the situation.

    Liked by 1 person

    • She’s a good candidate. WI Court of Appeals Judge Chris Taylor also explored a run but decided against it which imo is the right choice (she has a lot more baggage as a former WI Assemblywoman). I think Chris Taylor is probably gearing up for a run in 2026 against Rebecca Bradley, who is by far one of the worst conserative jurists in the country

      Liked by 1 person

      • Biden judges Roopali Desai and Lucy Koh on a 2-1 decision just reversed a lower court ruling which now gives consumers another chance to obtain damages and other relief in a California health care network… A reaffirmation of pushing our senators to confirm judges esp circuit court judges … I think the Dems are lining up nominees to have hearings and be voted out of committeetee to tee up for floor votes when Harris is around.

        Liked by 1 person

  9.  Had wordpress issues for the past few days so wanted to weigh in on a couple of topics.
    1) As with Zahid Quraishi, McConnell is simply throwing out Mary Rowland’s name (her age aside) to try and fool folks into thinking he and Republicans will be reasonable on a nomination.
    If Rowland was nominated, he and Republicans would have her portrayed as a radical LGBT rights activist who can’t be trusted to be a fair and impartial judge, just as they would make Quraishi into an Osama Bin Laden worshipper.
    The goal is to keep those seats open so a far right hack can fill them, nothing more.
    2) On the lack of Black men on the bench, the reality is with so many different minority groups underrepresented, everyone wants to have someone from their group on the bench (can’t blame them) and with Biden, they’re all finally getting a chance.
    I know for the 3rd Circuit a lot of folks in the LGBT community are rooting for Christopher Howland because while there are several lesbians on the Circuit courts now, the only gay male is Patrick Bumatay, who is a far right hack who is well outside the mainstream most LGBT legal groups are and that doesn’t sit well.
    Christopher Griffiths DUI takes him out of the running so if the nominee isn’t Howland, it will likely be Jennifer L. Hall, who is a former Kent clerk and prosecutor, whom are likely to be the nominees for the few remaining circuit court seats left.
    3) Rooting for Ryan Park for the 4th Circuit nomination.
    At this point, I think it’s pretty clear there won’t be any more cooperation on district court seats in red states.
    So be it, Circuit courts are the prize.
    Have to wait and see who we get in two days (hopefully.)

    Liked by 1 person

    • @Hank

      I completely agree with you about McConnell’s good faith efforts (I could barely type that with a straight face) on his now TWO recommendations to Biden for blue state circuit court seats. The Rowland recommendation is particularly ridiculous. Since I wasn’t posting comments on the last write up page, I actually went back to Harsh’s write up for Rowland years ago. I added the link to when McConnell mad ethe comment last week (Hard to believe there was only two comments on that write up) so whenever I am having a bad day, I can go back to look at it again & get a good laugh. The smirk he had on his face as he finished the speech was only second to the smirk he had on his face whenever he would talk about blocking Obama’s nomination for Garland to replace Scalia. Completely disingenuous.

      @Zack

      I 100% agree with everything you said. Sadly I don’t see any more red state district court judges getting confirmed before the election. I still think Biden should take my advice & nominate some more to excite whatever base is needed for that state. I think the Jackson nomination was brilliant for Montana. He might as well nominate more (Fill in the blank) in red states, particularly in swing states. We know Johnson isn’t going to turn in his blue slip for either of the two White men he recommended so Biden might as well nominate somebody like Ronnie V. Murray or maybe a pro-choice attorney. Or a voting rights attorney for the WDTN. Maybe an attorney close to one of the Tennessee Three.

      Like

      • One thing I forgot this morning when I was going over a recap of things that happened since the last write up. Good job by Biden in South Dakota. Once again he signed the commission of the Democrat, Eric Schulte first on June 3rd. Then he signed the commission of the Republican pick Camela Theeler second the next day on June 4th. To my memory, only twice has a Republican pick gotten their commission signed by Biden before a Democrat pick.

        Out of the four EDPA judges nominated in a 3 for 1 package deal, the first two commissions signed were Democrats. The Republican pick John Murphy was signed third on December 23, 2022. The fourth was the last of the three Democrats, however her commission wasn’t signed until the next year January 18, 2023. So I assume she had to finish up previous cases which sucks because she was actually the oldest out of the four & would have had seniority if she was ready on the day she was confirmed.

        The only other instance a Republican got seniority over a Democrat was the SDFL. The Democrat Becerra got her commission signed February 29th however Rubio’s backer’s nephew Leibowitz got his signed the next day on March 1st. The second Democrat Damian got her commission signed three days later on March 4th. Even if Biden had waited to sign both Leibowitz & Damian the same day, the Democrat was older & would have had seniority.

        But all in all, Biden is doing a good job making sur the Democrat gets seniority over the Republican in package deals. As I said, I don’t expect any more package deals before the election but hopefully he continues this trend if he is re-elected.

        Like

  11. @Gavi, I go back to Bush V Gore.
    Sandra Day O’Connor was open about the fact she didn’t want Gore picking her replacement and joined a 5-4 ruling that basically threw it in the face of Democrats that it was a ruling for Republicans to give their side a win and never to be used again.
    And people for the most part shrugged their shoulders.
    After that, was only going to go downhill from there.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Touching on some comments on the last write up regarding the net deficit of Black men on the circuit courts. I notice some users keep using the overall population of the country to justify the number of Black men on the circuit courts being above the national population of Black men. I would argue that is not a good way to look at the numbers.

    When you do that, you are including large pockets of the population that would never vote for Biden. You are including MAGA Republicans & people who would rather die than vote for Biden in those numbers when you include the entire population. If you are making the argument people like me are making, which is if you trying to please your base & swing voters, then that should be the population you use. When you use those numbers, I am sure you would find the number of Black men on the circuit courts isn’t all that overrepresented as much, if at all.

    Think about it like this. Let’s say you are thinking about selling advertisement slots for ABC for Sunday night when the NBA Finals are on. If you look at the demographics for all 52 Sundays in a year & base who should advertise or the NBA Finals based on that, you would probably be advertising products not geared towards who is going to be watching ABC for the Sunday the NBA Finals are on. Using myself as an example, I haven’t watched ABC once all year on a Sunday night until the Finals game this past Sunday. So a better metric to use would be basing your data on who watches NBA games ONLY, not who watches ABC every Sunday night.

    Same thing when talking about who Democrats should be nominating to the bench. You should not be including the entire country because we all know you could have a ham sandwich as the nominee for President & if you put a “R” to the left of the name, 43% of the country would vote for it regardless… Lol

    Liked by 1 person

    • @Dequan I have no idea what to make of your analogy. We’re not all sport fans or consumers of sporting entertainment.

      I know, I know, the hard fact of the actual population and percentage of black male appellate judges is against you. So instead of a countable and vastly acceptable metric (population size from the census, etc.) you want us to gerrymander the pool to fit your logic? How would we even know the “population” you’d rather use?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Yeah I usually agree with Dequan on other race-related issues, but Gavi is right here – and more importantly, the whole point of demographic diversity (or at least how the Dems have advocated for it) is for the bench to reflect the people it serves.

        If some groups (mostly White men, but Black men to a more limited extent) are overrepresented on the bench whereas other groups (especially Latinos and Black women before this administration) are underrepresented, then why shouldn’t the impetus be to correct the underrepresentation first?

        And to the extent that politics come into play here (though there’s no evidence that lower court judicial nominees will drive turnout, as the non-legal media rarely covers anything outside of SCOTUS), the Dems can’t win without strong support from both Black and Latino voters. I’m all for having more Black men on the appellate courts, but it’s hard to argue that the WH has done something wrong in focusing on Black women and other groups that were even more historically underrepresented.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @Gavi

        Ok sure, let me make it simple for you then. When the argument is being made that there have been a net defect of Black men on the circuit courts over the past decade (Which is a fact), some have argued that even with the reduction of Black men, they still are over represented when you look at the population of Black men versus the overall population of the country. What I am saying is, why would you use the entire population of the country. When you do that, you are including people like Marjorie Taylor Greene & even Donald Trump himself. You are including too many people that would never vote for Biden in the first place when you include the entire population of the country.

        If I am arguing Biden should be using judicial appointments to try & excite certain segments of the population that has or might vote for him (I know you & I disagree on if race should be used in determining judicial nominees but stay with me for a minute), then why would the counter argument use the ENTIRE population of the country, including those that would never vote for Biden? I’m only talking about Democrats, Independents & the small segment of moderate Republicans that would even consider voting for Biden. Therefore, I don’t think it makes sense to use the entire population of the country when trying to make a counter argument to the point Biden needs to use these appointments to excite & please those who would consider voting for him.

        Remember the basis of our disagreement as to if Biden should be nominating certain segments of the population (Black, Hispanic, woman, LGBT, union-side attorneys, etc.) for judicial nominees. I asked you if all of Biden’s circuit court nominees were Dale Ho’s but also all straight White men, would you take that deal. You answered yes. My second question was do you think if that was the case, would he lose votes if he didn’t nominate a single (Fill in the blank of any demographic I just listed). I believe you admitted yes, he would lose votes. THAT is my argument. If you have to use race to excite your base & get votes, then I would take some of the nominees to be not as good as Dale Ho in exchange for Biden not losing votes.

        As to the accusation that I or anybody else is saying Biden is to blame for the net deficit of Black men on the circuit courts, that’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m actually saying the opposite. Biden has nominated three so far. It’s a combination of Trump (Who didn’t nominate any, man or woman) & senate Republicans under Obama, that I consider most at fault for the net deficit. So pointing out Biden has nominated a record number of Black woman which could be the reason he has nominated fewer Black men isn’t really needed in the counter argument because nobody is blaming Biden in the first place.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Are we looking at only Biden judges or all judges? Your argument makes sense only if we are looking at Biden judges or just Dem appointed judges in general. Half of the judges are hacks appointed by GOP so if Black men are still over represented when including those (mostly white) hacks, then your argument falls through.

        Like

      • @Ryan J

        Yea we were talking about Biden circuit court judges. @Gavi (And I believe @Hank) made the argument that race should play absolutely no role in judicial appointments. Then when I brought up the net deficit of Black men on the circuit courts over the past decade & the need for Biden to do something to help that situation out (To be fair I initially made that argument pre Wamble & Kidd more so than now), they brought up how Black men are still overrepresented on the circuit courts than the overall population.

        My argument against the first point was just a fundamental disagreement with @Gavi. I’m sorry but when you are a politician you need votes to keep your job. If Biden nominated nothing but straight white men as all of his circuit court nominees, even if they all were “Dale Ho’s”, he would lose votes. Plain & simple, full stop, his base would not stand for him nominating 49 straight White men for 49 vacancies. So if @Gavi or anybody else agrees that is the case, you are either advocating that race still shouldn’t play a factor in these nominations even if it clearly will cost you votes, or you are arguing that maybe Biden should not nominate all straight White men, even if they are the best candidate in each scenario (Which would mean you agree with me).

        As to the second point, I see no reason why anybody would use the entire USA population to justify how many Black men Biden should be nominating when the entire USA population isn’t voting for Biden. He won’t even get half the population most likely to vote for him. So my argument is at the very least you should remove all registered Republicans that in polls said they would vote for Trump no matter what. Nobody is making an argument that Biden should be nominating judges to please Marjorie Taylor Green or anybody like her so why would you use data that includes her, or anybody like her.

        Like

      • This is such a fantastically bad and weak argument that I don’t know if there’s utility in continuing discussing it.
        “I see no reason why anybody would use the entire USA population to justify how many Black men Biden should be nominating when the entire USA population isn’t voting for Biden.”
        This is how literally anyone not named Dequan compare percentage of judges. Why stop at black men? One would have to use this same attenuated and gerrymandered logic to count all demographic groups. There would be no more black female circuit judges for the foreseeable future until this weird counting method matches this weird “population.”
        Tell Brookings and literally every single think tank to update their methodology to compare the appointed judges to Democrat’s voter registration numbers. And if they point out that party registration doesn’t necessarily match actual voting (like the state of WV and other traditionally registered Dems who solely vote Republican), tell them that doesn’t matter, this wasn’t meant to make sense, just radical quota-loving run amok.

        Liked by 1 person

      • There is an informative article in Bloomberglaw written by Tiana Headley..June 5th…It explains black male circuit judges have been taking senior status on the federal appeals courts under Biden..While no black circuit judges confirmed under Trump… Biden has focused on black women rightly to those courts. But only one black male has been confirmed so as Tiana put it black males have stalled at a net loss on the federal circuit court of appeals. I hope this simplifies things…Biden judges so I’m glad they nominated Embry..

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Gavi keeps pointing to me trying to use “attenuated and gerrymandered logic to count all demographic groups”. That’s exactly what the conversation is about. We are not talking about ALL judges. We are talking about circuit court judges that are Black men ONLY. So yes, of course we shouldn’t use date that includes ALL Americans because that isn’t what the conversation is about.

        We are talking about what ONE American (The President) should be doing to please the Americans that will possibly vote for him. If you want to have a conversation about ALL judges, we can have that. But if we are specifically talking about one President nominating one specific group of people to please a specific group of people, then yes, using date for ALL people in your counter arguments data makes no sense. I honestly don’t see why this is so hard to understand… Lol

        Like

      • @Ryan J

        Correct. The conversation is only talking about Black men on the circuit courts, not including the district courts. But overall I think @Gavi is making a principled argument about not taking race into consideration for ANY judicial nominations. While I disagree with him, I respect his views. It’s just not a realistic viewpoint for those in power to use in this day & age. That’s more so what the back & fourth is all about.

        Like

    • I believe both are conservatives. Conner qualified in October 2022, Johnson in February this year. Johnson’s term as chief is up on February 7. Those departure dates are conspicuously close to the presidential inauguration, although on both sides of it. Will be interesting to see how senators and the WH handle timing on filling these seats. If we get nominees this congress, I’d guess the PA one would be confirmed, and the NM one if Biden’s re-elected.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks, Ben.

      Yeah, Star. I know a lot of factors may go into when someone actually retires. But I can’t help but think that William Paul Johnson may be trolling with his date. Clearly, he wants to go senior so he pushed it out just long enough with the hope that a Republican president will be the one to negotiate who’ll fill the seat. We’re in a different world now from when Johnson was nominated and appointed so thank goodness for the NM senators’ blue slips.

      I don’t know what to make of the Christopher Conner date. Maybe he sees how painfully slowly the senators make recommendations and thinks that the sens won’t be able to recommend anyone in time for Biden to appoint before Jan 20.

      Liked by 2 people

      • This trolling happens a lot. R. Lanier Anderson similarly trolled Bush by announcing in July 2008 that he would go senior on Jan. 31, 2009. Diarmuid O’Scannlain trolled Obama by going senior on Dec. 31, 2016, knowing that the GOP Senate would not let Obama fill his seat.

        Liked by 1 person

    • @Ben

      As always, thank you for the update. The Conner announcement is good. We just had three vacancies on the court so hopefully there’s a surplus of names not chosen to quickly settle on somebody. With this being Biden’s birth district, I expect this seat to get filled before Inauguration Day. Even if it’s somebody who Senator Casey went to high school with like the last nominee who is 64, it would still be a flip so just het somebody reasonable confirmed at this point.

      Biden would have to be re-elected to fill the William Paul Johnson seat. New Mexico has had three really good judges confirmed under Biden so I hope they still go through the process of getting a nominee. Even if Biden wins & senate Democrats lose, as long as the nominee is confirmed before the senate adjourns, Biden can sign the commission once Johnson steps down officially.

      Like

  14. It’s going to be fascinating to see how senators/WH handle these vacancies. Filling Conner’s seat this session seems like a much easier lift to me than Johnsons, whose commission would have to be signed during a second Biden term.

    If I remember correctly from the Kent Jordan discussion, there really isn’t any precedent for filling vacancies this late, is there?

    Liked by 1 person

    • I tried to comment yesterday but my comment didn’t got through (thanks WordPress). Anyways, for the 3rd circuit seat in Delaware, I’m expecting Delaware Court of Chancery judge Kathaleen McCormick or Delaware Supreme Court Justice Abigail LeGrow.

      And for the final vacancy in the Central District of California without a nominee, if I had to guess, I would guess Orange County Superior Court Judge Vibhav Mittal. He is a Democrat but clerked for Judge Amul Thapar.

      Liked by 3 people

    • None that I can think of, but that doesn’t matter as long as you have the president and a senate majority willing to confirm. The act of appointment cannot come before the vacancy, though.

      I think the WH and senate should still go ahead with nominating and confirming a nominee. If the next president is Trump, the NM senators can use it as a bargaining chip to get him to nominate other moderate district court judges in exchange for their blue slips. For example, the NM senators could say: “If you sign X’s commission, we will return blue slips for future moderate district court nominees you may put forward. If you reject and withdraw the confirmed nominee, we will never agree to any district court nominee you put forward.”

      Or at the very least, Biden should definitely nominate (and renominate after Jan 3, 2025) someone to the seat, even if the senate doesn’t act on it. Like above, the senators can use their future blue slip to bargain with Trump so that he doesn’t withdraw the nominee. This has been done multiple times at the start of admins.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Yeah, I knew it was legally possible, just didn’t know if there was precedent. I agree, that they should go through with nominees for all three. There’s no reason the replacements for Jordan and Conner shouldn’t be confirmed and have their commissions signed the day the vacancy becomes official.

        Obviously Biden would need to at least win re election to sign the NM commission, but as you said, even if he loses it’s worth it to use as leverage. I would probably go with an older, more conventional nominee for this reason.

        Liked by 2 people

  15. Biden and the senate may well be breaking new ground if successors to these two and/or Jordan are confirmed this congress. Going back to 1937, when the inauguration was moved from March to January, 73 Article III judges have left the bench voluntarily within two weeks of a regularly scheduled inauguration. Only two had their initial successors nominated before they left the bench:

    D OR: Marco Hernandez was nominated by Bush on July 23, 2008; his nomination expired January 3, 2009; Garr King stepped down on January 30, 2009; Obama nominated Hernandez on July 14, 2010; Hernandez was confirmed on February 7, 2011

    8th: Jane Kelly was nominated on January 31, 2013; Michael Melloy stepped down on February 1, 2013; Kelly was confirmed on April 24, 2003

    That also makes Melloy-Kelly the fastest of those 73 vacancies to get filled. 71 of those seats were filled by the newly inaugurated president, 1 was abolished, and 1 (Coffman-Boom of ED KY) was filled by the next president. 13 have occurred in the two weeks before an inauguration; 60 in the two weeks after.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks for the stats. Yeah, it’s going to be fascinating. The 3rd and MD Pa vacancies seem a lot more straightforward to me since they will retire before Biden’s first term ends.

      The D NM one seems like a bit more of a stretch that will likely draw some more GOP ire. But I think the WH should try for it anyway. Of course, it would look a lot better if Dems hold the senate, but we know that will be an uphill fight.

      Liked by 2 people

  16. Mark Kelly wrapped up today. As I said, nothing big should happen on the floor this week, but we’ll see if any new nominations come in tomorrow for a 7/10 hearing.

    I saw Butler came down with COVID earlier this week. Not sure if she voted today but considering that 1-day isolation guideline, hopefully she’ll be around Thursday for the SJC meeting as we know at least one of the nominees will be a party-line vote.

    In addition to Thursday’s SJC meeting, the Finance Committee posted a business meeting on Thursday for the three Tax Court nominees from February. Not sure if they’ll get held over or if that stalling tactic is primarily seen in the SJC.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Getting back to the two vacancies announced by @Ben earlier today, this illustrates why a second Biden term is so important. As much harm that Trump did to the judiciary, four more years of Biden judges would probably put the judiciary ahead of where it was on Obama’s last day with the exception of the SCOTUS. Here are my thoughts on each seat;

    New Mexico – Strickland, Urias & Garcia are three really good picks so far by Biden. I know the dynamics off replacing Johnson might not make it as to get a pick as good as one of those three, but here are some names I would like to see considered…

    Holly Agajanian (born c. 1973)

    Aja Brooks (born c. 1983)

    Shammara Henderson (born c. 1982) – She would be my first choice for the 10th if judge Harris were to leave the bench.

    Mollie C. McGraw (born c. 1979)

    Alexandra Freedman Smith (born c. 1977)

    MDPA – I fully expect another well-connected nominee here. But here are some picks I would like to see;

    Heidi Freese (born c. 1976)

    Marielle Macher (born c. 1986)

    Christopher Sherwood (born c. 1986)

    Like

    • Henderson could be the front runner for the NM seat. Unless there is a Native American possibility there.

      MDPA- it’s a Harrisburg seat, and that’s where the nominee should come from. It’s also currently an all white court. Wonder if Biden and the senators try to change that.

      Like

      • @Jaime

        Great two points. Looking at @Ethan’s list, these are the only Native American names I see for his list of New Mexico;

        G. Michelle Brown-Yazzie (born c. 1973)

        Vanessa Ray-Hodge (born c. 1981)

        And you are correct about the MDPA. Unbelievably the court has never had a person of color on it even with three Biden picks. We are down to 19 of the nation’s 91 districts that have never had a person of color on it (Not counting nominees that have already been confirmed but yet to get their commission signed. Hopefully Biden can change that at least on this court to get the number down to 18.

        Like

  18. Biden’s had the three Wyoming Valley seats to fill, and the legal community there is very white. The legal community in Harrisburg is much more diverse, and if Biden replaces Conner, it will be the first Dem appointee in Harrisburg since Sylvia Rambo broke the gender barrier in 1979.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. The 9th circuit page on wikipedia is saying that the court membership is updated as of 6/10/2024, indicating a recent change.

    I don’t see any vacancies, retirements or deaths of judges in active or senior status. Anyone know what’s up?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Maybe somebody updated something besides a change in the composition of the court. Like perhaps something changed elsewhere on the page & they just updated the date to the day they did it. But there’s been no changes to the 9th since de Alba.

      Unfortunately, a lot of people who use to take more care when it came to Wikipedia stopped using it after they allowed idiots to start dictating policy. So I wouldn’t put too much stock into it to be honest. You probably can get more accurate info from this blog here at this point… Lol

      Like

Leave a comment