Danna Jackson – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana

The first new judicial nominee to the District of Montana in over a decade, Danna Jackson would, if confirmed, be the first Native American judge on the Montana federal bench.

Background

A Montana native, Jackson grew up on the Flathead Indian Reservation in Montana. She received a B.A. from the University of Montana in 1993 and her J.D. subsequently from the University of Montana Law School in 1996. Jackson subsequently worked for the National Indian Gaming Commission and then as a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate from 2002 to 2005, working for Democratic Senator Tim Johnson. Jackson then joined Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP as counsel.

In 2010, Jackson became a federal prosecutor in Montana. In 2016, she left the position to become Chief Legal Counsel at the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation in Helena. In 2021, she moved to the U.S. Department of the Interior as Senior Counselor to the Director of the Bureau of Land Management and to the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science.

Since 2023, Jackson has served as Tribal Attorney for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes.

History of the Seat

Jackson has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana to replace Judge Dana Christensen, who will take senior status upon the confirmation of a successor. She has the support of Sen. Jon Tester for the district court but not of Sen. Steve Daines, who has indicated that he will not return a blue slip for Jackson.

Legal Experience

Jackson has held a variety of positions during her legal career, including in both state and federal governments, in the U.S. Senate, as well as in private practice. For example, early in her career, Jackson represented James Van Gundy, who sued the mining company P.T. Freeport Indonesia for wrongful discharge. See Van Gundy v. PT Freeport Indonesia, 50 F. Supp. 2d 993 (D. Mont. 1999).

However, the most significant portion of Jackson’s career in litigation is her time as a federal prosecutor in Montana. In her role as an Assistant U.S. Attorney with the District of Montana, Jackson prosecuted a variety of offenses, including handling revocations of supervised release. See, e.g., United States v. Whitford, No. CR 13-23-GF-BMM (D. Mont. Oct. 4, 2016) (revoking supervised release based on the defendant’s use of methamphetamines and opioids). Jackson also worked on opposing section 2255 petitions from defendants seeking to correct alleged illegalities in their sentence. See, e.g., United States v. Doney, No. CR-14-82-GF-BMM (D. Mont. Aug. 9, 2018).

Statements and Writings

Jackson has frequently written on the law, particularly involving issues of Indian law. While some of her writings expounds on the current nature of law, other articles advocated for changes to the law. For example, while a staffer with Johnson’s office, Jackson wrote in support of strengthening voting rights protections for Indian voters. See Danna R. Jackson, Eighty Years of Indian Voting: A Call to Protect Indian Votings Rights, 65 Mont. L. Rev. 269 (2004) (available at https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2313&context=mlr). In particular, Jackson was critical of increased voter id efforts pushed by South Dakota Republicans, noting that such efforts likely led to decreased registration among Indian voters. See id. at 287.

In another article written during her time as a prosecutor, Jackson discussed the overlap between tribal jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction regarding crimes that were committed on tribal lands, and advocated for greater communication and collaboration between the tribes and federal government in determining the right actors to charge certain crimes. See Danna R. Jackson, Cooperative (and Uncooperative) Federalism at Tribal, State, and Local Levels: A Case for Cooperative Charging Decisions in Indian Country, 76 Mont. L. Rev. 127 (2015) (available at https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232676413.pdf).

Political Activity

Jackson has frequently been a donor to other Montana politicians. While almost all of Jackson’s political contributions have been to Democrats, Jackson has also given to nonpartisan candidates such as Chief Justice Mike McGrath of the Montana Supreme Court, as well as to 2020 Republican Attorney General candidate Jon Bennion.

Overall Assessment

As of this moment, Jackson’s largest obstacle to confirmation is not anything in her own record but rather the blue slip policy, which requires the acquiescence of her home state senator. As long as Senator Daines maintains opposition (as he has declared) to moving Jackson’s nomination, she is unlikely to be confirmed.

38 Comments

  1. Another great article here. I agree that Jackson will not be confirmed anytime soon due to the blue slip issue, but she’s a terrific and well qualified nominee otherwise.

    Liked by 1 person

    • If GOP wins the senate, they will not abide by any rules or will change the rules to what they..want.. Trump and McConnell have already filled judicial positions with incompetent out of steps right wing judges..They may get a chance again.. Because of this I say if even one blue slip is accepted nominate and try to confirm said person ….And circuit cour positions Biden team get busy and nominate who Derms want to fill the remaining spots…im hoping Schumer dosn’t get distracted with issues that the Senate has no time to debate and pass this year….We need as many confirmed as possible…Sotomayor can wait she’s healthy not like RBG as I bet the GOP would stall and stall her replacement.. IMO only

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Even though Dana Jackson won’t be confirmed this year, I still think it was a great move to nominate her. I think Biden should do more of it in red states (And Wisconsin).

    I know some on this blog think Democrats don’t care about the courts but that is an old & outdated statement. In this case, even if it mobilizes a small segment of the Native American vote, that will help Tester in a tight race. Polls are a lot closer than some people would have thought in other senate races such as Florida so why not give it a try & nominate people that will motivate some bases in those states. It’s better than just leaving the seats empty & not having them work for you at all.

    Like

  3. This might be the first time I’ve ever seen Harsh say “the nominee is unlikely to be confirmed”. Ughhh. But I remember Republicans saying they wouldn’t vote for the JUDGES Act (expanding the number of federal judges) if blue slips for district court nominees were ended.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. This reminds me of an article I recently saw about North Carolina and the AAPI population in that state. The TLDR is that Asian Americans are still a relatively small portion of the North Carolina population but they are the fasted growing demographic in NC and since NC usually has such tight elections, they could carry a lot of power political if parties start doing outreach.

    We’ve discussed Ryan Park a lot on here and the possibility of nominating him to the 4th. His credentials are impeccable and warrant at the very least consideration for appointment to that seat. He’d be the first AAPI judge on the 4th (I believe) and the first federal judge form NC. I could see that generating a lot of press cycles in the Tar Heel State, especially given the history of race and NC federal seats, i.e Jesse Helms blocking Wynn for years bc he didn’t want to see a non white person nominated to it. Would is energize even a handful of AAPI voters? Would it make them more inclined to vote Democrat?

    I’m not saying this will happen, nor am I saying this should be a reason to nominate Park. But I do wonder if it could be a happy biproduct.

    https://www.wfae.org/2024-05-29/asian-americans-aapi-north-carolina-growing-political-power

    Liked by 2 people

      • @Dequan

        I have not one shred of evidence what Dems are doing with all this time off but if they’re town halling and otherwise interacting with their constituents in order to better represent them in DC, I’m not mad.

        Conservative platforms on the other hand are so narrow minded, myopic and demagogic that their constituents don’t really need face time just so long as their politicians are trolling Dems.

        But I think what we would ALL like to see is less of what seems like ineffective dithering when Dems ARE in session. No Article III judicial confirmations for the whole month of June is as inexcusable to me as I’m sure it is to you.

        But as I said before, if they get all (or most) of these judicial nominees confirmed at the end of the day, I’m good.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Ads

        I agree. If they would either maximize the 3 days they work or (Here’s a novel idea) come in earlier on Monday like 1pm & work a full day Thursday until 8pm, they could still take 3 days off & get so much more accomplished.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @Dequan:

        I know that’a subject that irks you, but I don’t see any Democratic Senator is interested to follow your advise, because they enjoy being at home more than being in Washington and seeing Marsha Blackburn and the other GOP Senators every day.

        That was no great working period, but as I said, we maybe see that more often when the election is looming, and Synema and/or Melendez are no more fancied to come to DC and work for their constituents, the FERC confirmations were important, and the cloture of Kashubhai was not running very well.

        The September working period will be interesting, I think they can’t cancel it because shutdown is looming again for September 30, but I also doubt that they are doing lots of judicial confirmations then.

        So the lame duck and the hope for a good outcome of the elections is remaining. Otherwise most the business for 2024 is done after half of the year is over.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I wish I had any confidence you will end up being right & they cancel some of the September (Or for that matter August) vacation. I’m not confident at all but I would be more than happy if you end up being right.

        Like

      • I’m not a Republican so it’s not what they did for me. It’s what they did for conservatives. 230 federal judges including 54 circuit court judges in one term that s a LOT.

        And in all for them having some time off. But six weeks for the Summer, two weeks for a one day holiday like 4th of July, the entire month of October. Most of the people they are asking to vote for them don’t get that much time off in two years. And as Republicans have shown us when they are in power, you don’t have to take that much time off.

        Like

      • The outcome was a Trump kiss but we are still dealing with those 230 judges for a generation regardless. So it would be nice to have 230 Biden judges from one term to counter them. But we won’t with all the recess time we are taking… Lol

        Like

  12. Tanya Bosier and Judith Pipe have been sworn in on Friday, meaning eleven vacancies remaining at the DC Superior Court, as their magistrate judge positions have to be backfilled, and as there are usually ten applications for the position of the assiociate judges, we can assume, that there are a lot less for the magistrates, positive is that both won’t need much onboarding, but as already mentioned, the workload will not shrink, as they will probably taking their dockets with them. Three of the seven district courts nominees waiting for a floor vote are successors of judges who have elevated to the circuit court. At least magistrate judges at the Superior Court of DC won’t need senate confirmation. Ten remaining vacancies are still a lot, Schumer has filed cloture for one of the three remaining ones, five are waiting for a committee vote, who is not scheduled yet, two have no nominee, and there is at least one more retirement upcoming in 2024.

    I hope they can squeeze them in, because a possible GOP administration is even less interested in keep the judiciary in DC working, and lots of the judges there are over sixty years old and further openings have to be expected. All of us would prefer a voice vote for them, but don’t see that, Oler is White, served in the armed forces for a long time and is Special Master at the Court of Federal Claims, where they are dealing with vaccine matters only, and she got none.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. These people who signed up to be a senator, have to do the so called grunt work or whatever you want to call it.. And that means going thru the time consuming exercise of voting for cloture then the final vote for Executive and judicial nominees. It’s a shame it has to be that way, but it is what it is. Gone are the days when 15 nominees could be confirmed via unanimous consent and it would take 2 minutes.

    Senators can do the fun things to like going to a mansion in the Hollywood Hills or Malibu for fundraisers, and yes that is part of the job to.

    It’s not like they would have to work around the clock to confirm nominees. Just stay a Friday from time to time. That REALLY is not asking too much.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a comment