Mary Kay Costello – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

In a rush to fill as many vacancies as they can before the 2024 election, AUSA Mary Kay Costello has been nominated by the Biden Administration to fill the oldest pending vacancy in Pennsylvania.

Background

Born in 1968, Costello received a B.A. summa cum laude from Temple University in 1998 after eight years in the U.S. Air Force. Costello then received a J.D. from the Temple University Beasley School of Law in 2001. Costello then joined Saul Ewing LLP in Philadelphia. In 2004, Costello joined the Philadelphia office of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.

In 2008, Costello became an Assistant U.S. Attorney with the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where she has served since.

History of the Seat

Costello has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This seat opened on December 31, 2021, when Judge Cynthia Rufe moved to senior status.

Legal Experience

While Costello started her career in private practice, she has spent the largest portion of her career as a federal prosecutor. Costello started her time with the office prosecuting narcotics cases. See, e.g., United States v. Yokshan, 658 F. Supp. 2d 654 (E.D. Pa. 2009). In another notable case, Costello prosecuted violations of the Lacey Act, which bars the illegal trafficking of animals. See United States v. MacInnes, 23 F. Supp. 3d 536 (E.D. Pa. 2014).

Costello’s career also included arguing appeals before the Third Circuit. For example, Costello argued in favor of an inventory search of an automobile against a Fourth Amendment challenge. See United States v. Mundy, 621 F.3d 283 (3d Cir. 2010). See also United States v. Joseph, 730 F.3d 336 (3d Cir. 2013).

Political Activity

Costello’s only political contributions consist of two contributions to Biden and two to Sen. Bob Casey.

Overall Assessment

Provided that her nomination is able to fit into the crowded Senate schedule, Democrats should be able to confirm Costello and fill this vacancy.

432 Comments

  2. Ethan's avatar

    Yet another recent pick who wasn’t on my radar. Still one more vacancy in EDPA (the seat vacated by Gene E.K. Pratter upon her death). I’d love for Susan Lin to be the nominee but I’m not getting my hopes up given she would not be easily confirmable (she signed the same letter calling out Kavanaugh that Jennifer Sung also signed). Although I will note that it appears EDPA has never had an AAPI judge.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        @Joe

        Haaaaaa… Crazy times that two sitting U.S. senators are so bad, it took until the last line of the joke for you to realize it wants a real quote… Lol

        @Frank

        On the Trump immunity ruling from today, absolutely scary ruling today. The fact that we have six Supreme Court justices that would sign on to this nonsense, shows why the states of this election is so high. Nixon probably would have served his entire second term had he served under the Roberts court instead of the Burger court. I don’t care if Biden was a vegetable, I want him or ANY Democrat to be the president to replace Thomas & Alito when they eventually leave the bench (One way or another).

        As for Susan Lin (Or anybody we speculate about), it depends. Each individual will be different but our contenders are only speculation at its heart so unless we have a confirmation they don’t want to be a federal judge, I wouldn’t rule it out. As I said previously, I reached out to Fred Smith Jr., my number one recommendation for the NDGA. He was nice enough to reply to my email & inform me that while he is honored to be considered, at this time it is not best for him & his family to apply for the vacancy. So in his case, we can rule him out.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ads's avatar

        @Frank

        …and with the way this SCOTUS is acting, I posit that the judicial branch is going to absolute sh*t! AKA piloting the destruction of the very purpose of the judicial branch as a check on executive branch authoritarianism…and it is doing it FAST! So the destruction you fear is ALREADY happening in real time. There is no point in failing to act in order to preserve the judicial branch if the result is the destruction of the judicial branch.

        On another note, people need to get it out of their heads that there is anything magical about a 9 member Supreme Court. That is not required by the Constitution.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Frank's avatar

        My fear is that the Democrats continue to delegitimize the courts and as a result we see the continued degradation of the judiciary, which has already been happening. Are you really so naïve to think if Democrats expanded SCOTUS Republicans wouldn’t respond in kind once they returned to power?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ads's avatar

        @Frank

        I’m 100% sure Republicans WOULD expand the Court once they get back in power (IF they do…because if Dems are smart, they’ll give DC statehood with a simple majority vote in the Senate and add two Senators in order to bolster their majority).

        And if the Republicans do, so what? The degradation of which you speak is that of the judiciary branch becoming nothing more than an overtly political tool.

        Newsflash! It already IS!!! This SCOTUS majority demonstrates it all the time now (Roberts USED TO care about optics, now he doesn’t give a damn anymore). Doesn’t matter what the lower courts do. They’ll just take the cases that cut against Trump while denying cert to the ones that benefit him.

        The Court could expand to 100+ members at this point for all I care as each party keeps adding members. The dignity of the judicial branch is gone (because SCOTUS heads the branch). It’s nakedly political now. Might as well just accept it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        @Frank

        Why is it always incumbent on Democrats to preserve the norms? So Republicans break every norm known to man to get power. Now that they have the courts, Democrats should just go back to norms until the Republicans on the courts die off?

        What if that takes a decade, or two decades? Do we just say oh well, & watch our rights deteriorate in the mean time for the sake of going back to the norms that Republicans had no issue with breaking?

        Like

    • lilee2122's avatar

      IMO do not expand SCOTUS now . There’s no time in the 118th Congress if we are to get judges confirmed. Scary if we would succeed to expand the court now only to not have time to fill the seats and Trump wins

      I read some of the Scotus Immunity decision . I have to say there are a few one liners that Judge Chutkin can rely on to ascertain some valid charges and void others

      Liked by 2 people

    • Gavi's avatar

      And despite the rampant wishful thinking of many in here, he’s likely to do so. this means that this will become less academic and more of an actual question. The judiciary will be especially hit hard. Trump could be the first president since FDR to appointment 5 or more justices to SCOTUS. He already appointed three. From the leaked recording of Mrs. Alito, we know that her husband plans to retire sometime during the next [Republican] administration. And Thomas would surely retire then, too.

      The only question is whether Trump will max out at 5. Or will he be able to replace a liberal who has involuntarily left the bench.

      Not to mention the lower courts.

      God help us…

      Liked by 2 people

    • Gavi's avatar

      It was always ridiculous and wishful thinking to think she would. Even if she was inclined to retire, she wouldn’t have waited until the end. She would have followed a similar timeline as Breyer to give Dems more than enough time to replace her. But folks repeat the same fantastical views about this and others things on here on a bi-weekly basis, so it’s best to just let them.

      Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        It’s one of those situations where no news is “news.”Sotomayor knows Biden so I am sure if she planned to leave notice would have been provided in advance.

        Since the last last search to Breyer was narrow (Black women candidates) it would be necessary to her to reach out to the White House.

        I remember when Thurgood Marshall retired it was on the last day but the White House under George Bush saw the writing on the wall.They announced Thomas on or near 4th of July.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Joe's avatar

    Yes, the end of the term was always sort of the “drop dead” date. Gavi is correct that the more likely time was always going to be early in the year to give the WH/Senate plenty of notice, but there is at least some precedent for announcing suddenly at the end of June (Anthony Kennedy).

    It seems Sotomayor is committed to at least another couple of years. All we can do is hope that it will go according to plan.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I’ve lost track. Where are we at on pending nominees for the non-Article 3 courts needing a hearing? Any Superior Court DC nominees that haven’t had a hearing yet? How about the two DC Court of Appeal nominees? And the Tax Court nominees?

      I think there’s a really good chance we get a new batch tomorrow. Now will there be at least five, will there be any I give a grade of A or A+ to & will there be any withdrawals such as Kanter tomorrow is another subject.

      Like

      • tsb1991's avatar

        I realized after the post I wanted to mention that yes, the two DC Appeals Court Nominees still need a hearing as well as the latest batch of Tax Court nominees. Always a chance they happen next week, we’d know by tomorrow if anything happens next Wednesday.

        For the SJC, I know we expect a nominations hearing to be posted tomorrow, biggest question for that hearing is if Perry can get submitted Tuesday after Maldonado is confirmed Monday and can get slipped into next week’s hearing. Given it’s for an Illinois seat I’m sure Durbin would have no issue getting his own nominee etched in.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thomas's avatar

        We have 3 remaining Superior Court nominees waiting for a floor vote, 5 more will hopefully added after Tuesday. There are no more nominees waiting for a hearing, because 2 vacancies have no nominee yet.

        No nominee for the Court of Appeals of DC have had their hearing yet.

        Three of the tax court nominees are waiting for a floor vote, the other three for the scheduling of their hearing.

        Liked by 1 person

      • keystone's avatar

        I believe it’s….

        DC Superior Court has 10 vacancies/pending noms. Of those:

        • 1 is on the exec calendar and has had cloture filed (Willoughby)
        • 2 are on the exec calendar (Nguyen and Okocha)
        • 5 have had hearings and will be voted out of committee next week (Beatty-Arthur, Troung, Bouchet, Johnston, McKenzie)
        • 2 still need nominees

        For tax court, there are 6 vacancies/pending noms:

        • 3 are on the exec calendar (Way, Landy, Jenkins)
        • 3 still need hearings (Arbeit, Guider, and Fung)

        For DC Court of Appeals, there are 2 vacancies/pending noms:

        • 2 still need hearings (Palmore and Gonzalez)

        Liked by 1 person

  11. lilee2122's avatar

    I watched Harris and Biden and other candidates debate 4 years ago….I swear Harris stiffened her spine and turned on Biden there….I think Biden respected her for VP afterwards. Not many like Harris. I have come to believe she has a real spine, which is essential for the office…

    Liked by 1 person

    • shawnee68's avatar

      I don’t doubt her resolve. But, like Gavin Newsom she has too much baggage to be a Presidential candidate.

      The media is trying to force out Biden but if Kamala became the candidate they will turn on her too.

      They complained about Bill Clinton and “Clinton fatigue.” Then when it was Al Gore’s turn, the media said he had no personality.

      No one on D side is ever good enough.Except, Michelle Obama who hates politics and living in Washington D.C

      Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        I don’t see how you separate the judiciary from the executive in an election year.

        When will someone admit that the President is doing a good job nominating judges.

        I am happy to hear that Biden nominated Ryan Park notwithstanding the objections of Tillis and Budd.

        There was a time when such objections from home state Senators would kill a nomination .

        I think Biden should fight back.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Frank's avatar

        I’ve stated multiple times here that I’ve been generally pleased with most of his nominees, and most people posting frequently here have been as well, so I’m not sure where you are getting that from. My point had more to do with the hypothetical that he will drop out of the presidential race and how it is a pure fantasy at this point in time. Of course the nominees from a different president would be different in scope, particularly if you are comparing to the opposing party.

        Liked by 1 person

  12. Dequan's avatar

    I hope the WH doesn’t make us wait too late tomorrow for the new batch. Hopefully some news articles come out early in the morning with hints if not names of the new nominees. I’ll be checking North Carolina’s newspapers closely.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Good to see three of the four nominees be people we have spoken extensively about on the blog.

      Ryan Park was my clear front runner from the beginning. He should shoot to the top of the list for the first AAPI justice under a Democrat administration for some time to come once confirmed. He will be the second state solicitor general Biden put in the circuit courts along with Toby Heytens, also in the 4th circuit. Both clerked for RBG… A (A high A)

      Gail A. Weilheimer was the only one of the four we haven’t spoken about. Nothing particularly progressive about her. Born c. 1970, practiced criminal defense & was an adjunct professor… B

      Jonathan Hawley was my second choice out of the recommended nominees, albeit my first choice lives across the border in Missouri so I can understand this pick. It will be a relief even if only for one day to have a Hawley with common sense in the SJC when he gets his hearing next month… Lol… A-

      Byron Conway was the better of the two recommendations. It would be really nice if Johnson turns in his blue slip so he can get a hearing but we all know how I feel about Johnson when it forms to doing anything honorable so I’m not holding my breath… B+

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Btw did anybody else noticed the error in the announcement this morning? Hawley has the number 1 to the left of his name but the other two district court nominees don’t have the number 2 & 3 next to theirs. I’m fine with errors if that means they are rushing to get the announcement early. They will probably fix it soon.

      Like

  19. keystone's avatar

    Wow. I am very surprised they got that EDPA nom so quickly (and ahead of the MDPA one).

    I’m not familiar with Weilheimer. Looks like she’s been pretty involved with Montgomery County politics and community over the years (MontCo is an important piece of PA win). I also see that she served as co-counsel and top legal advisor to the 2011 transition team serving MontCo County Commissioner Josh Shapiro (aka PA governor and shining star in the Dem party). I suspect their connection probably helped.

    https://patch.com/pennsylvania/limerick/exceptional-candidates-for-court-of-common-pleas

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Joe's avatar

    After today’s announcement we are down to just 7 vacancies that can be filled without Republican blue slips in Biden’s first term:

    3rd CCA, SD Ca, CD Ca, ND NY, Arizona, ND Ga, and MD Pa

    This doesn’t count that New Mexico seat that won’t open until 1/25/25 or any other nominations that might get pulled (Mangi, Kanter, etc.).

    We should look for further nominations on August 14, August 28, and possibly October 16th.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Joe's avatar

    If the senate is able to confirm each of the current nominees that would be 235 judges. Of course, Kanter, DSW, Jackson, and possibly Conway all have blue slip /ABA rating issues. If you put those four to the side then it would be only 231.

    If Biden names nominees for the 7 remaining vacancies and they are all confirmed then that would be 238.

    Liked by 2 people

  25. keystone's avatar

    Something that worries me about Weilheimer is that she seems to have presided over A LOT of abuse cases. I hope WH is prepping her for the Blackburn at some point yelling you’re too easy on criminals bc you only sentenced this person to 20 years instead of life.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. tsb1991's avatar

    With Park’s nomination, I think we’re down to just one appeals court vacancy needing a nominee and that’s probably curtains for appeals court nominees for Biden’s term?

    Also, I’m sure it was expected by people here but I hadn’t seen it mentioned, but both Tillis and Budd are opposed to Park, meaning this will be another 50 + possible VP nomination to confirm. The other issue is that was the nominee Tillis was alluding to in that business meeting when he said he got assurances from some Democrats about not voting to confirm whoever Biden nominated? Outside of Manchin, if that’s the case Sinema may be an issue as if I remember she’d he a pretty good relationship with Tillis.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Gavi's avatar

    Tillis and Budd joint Statement:

    “This nomination is a non-starter and the White House has already been informed they do not have the votes for confirmation. While the White House has fallen short of engaging the advice and consent process in good faith for North Carolina’s judicial vacancies, we still hope to work together to find a consensus nominee who can earn bipartisan support and be confirmed.”

    If this is a bluff, it’s a pretty confident one. Only time will tell who’ll end up with egg on their face.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      @Gavi

      WOW… I wonder who the second Senator is that Tillis & Budd got a confirmation they will vote no from. If it’s Sinema, she’s leaving the senate so I think it’s possible to turn her around to a yes. If it’s one of the Nevada senators, I’d actually be more worried than Sinema. Tillis would be making one Hell of a bluff if that’s what it is. As you said, only time will tell.

      On Conway, I wonder if there was some kind of deal that had the WH confident Johnson will turn in his blue slip. The fact that they waited a year to name Conway to now nominate him 125 days before the election, makes me wonder if a deal was made or if this is another Dana Jackson. With Conway being a moderate white male, I’m not sure what the thinking would be if they are trying to repeat the Jackson nomination.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Thomas's avatar

        As I have already said some time ago, Johnson might be the one, who is overexciting the obstructionism respectively witholding the Blue Slip after originally recommending candidates twice (William Pocan as judge at the Eastern District of Wisconsin and Sopen Shah as US Attorney at the Western District of Wisconsin), so maybe Durbin here goes on without his consent. There are two judges on the court, who are over eighty years old and it’s the longest open district court vacancy to date.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I don’t always agree with @Gavi but on this one he’s 100% correct. If Durbin was gonna scrap blue slips it would have been for Scott Colom & certainly wouldn’t be 125 days before an election where there’s is an at least 50% chance both Trump & senate Republicans win.

        Even if Durbin was considering it, Byron B. Conway wouldn’t be the nominee that breaks the camel’s back. If a progressive Black man in is early 40’s right after senate Democrats gained a senate seat bringing their majority to 51-49 wasn’t enough for Durbin, I highly doubt a centrist White man would be enough.

        If this was even a tough, then Biden would have scraped Johnson’s recommendations & went with a superstar pick. Had Biden nominated Jarrett Adams this morning for instance, I would have happily agreed it would be worth consideration. But not for Conway.

        Like

      • Thomas's avatar

        @Gavi & @Dequan

        I also don’t believe that Durbin is ditching the Blue Slip now and because of a district court vacancy in Wisconsin, but in general terms Johnson a good candidate for not honoring the BS in a particular case, as Durbin has explained multiple times. I know he would have been able to do so earlier under the condition race (Colom) or judicial emergency (Texas and Florida), but hasn’t done it then, so he won’t do it now, too.

        But on the question how to deal with senators, who are refusing to cooperate with the WH and are keen to keep them open for the next president an answer has to be found.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Hmmmm… Anything short of an actual statement from Johnson & you can leave me in the category of skeptical. As a matter of fact, I would need to see the statement written in blood for me to be convince before actually seeing Conway at the SJC hearing… Lol

      But I would love to be wrong of course. If somehow I am, I believe only the Alabama vacancy will be the last one that predated Biden’s inauguration that will go unfilled his entire first term.

      Like

      • Gavi's avatar

        Don’t get me wrong, I am not bullish on Johnson’s good behavior. I am just saying that by all accounts so far, this is his pick. Conway isn’t exactly another Dana Jackson, like you said. He has no political sacrificial value for Biden.

        Also, Johnson waited the night before Pocan’s hearing to make his objection public. Whatever his position is on Conway, I wouldn’t expect him to announce it much in advance of the hearing that Conway would be qualified for.

        The bigger worry for me is Conway being more to the right than a moderate.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Joe's avatar

      Johnson is enough of an oddball that this doesn’t completely surprise me. Timing seems strange though given that the recommendation came last year.

      Regarding the 4th circuit, I think they’ll likely be able to get it through after the elections. Democrats will either be emboldened following a big November or they’ll be angry and looking to stick it to Trump and Company. In either case, I think they’ll muster the votes.

      Liked by 2 people

  29. Zack's avatar

    A nominee that meets Tillis/Budd’s approval will be in his or her late 50’s, early 60’s and will still have his/her nomination dragged out.
    Kudos to Biden and company for not caving and going with the best nominee IMO.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. keystone's avatar

    Anyone else notice how hard they’ve been pushing endorsements for Park right from the start?

    “The National Fraternal Order of Police, the North Carolina Police Benevolent Association, the president of the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police as well as current and past chairs of the North Carolina Bar Association’s Appellate Rules Committee wrote letters of recommendation in support of Park’s nomination.”

    ….

    Park’s work as deputy solicitor general and solicitor general has been “exemplary,” said Henry A. King Jr, 2024 president of the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police in a recommendation letter.

    “Mr. Park’s commendable track record underscores his unwavering dedication to the rule of law and his steadfast commitment to upholding traditional constitutional values,” he said.

    The White House called attention in its release to Republican signatories including Justice Robert Edmunds and Justice Barbara Jackson on the letter from the North Carolina Bar Association’s Appellate Rules Committee. Both Edmunds and Jackson are Republican former Justices on the NC Supreme Court.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-picks-nc-solicitor-general-120000164.html

    They are definitely going on the offensive form the start to try and blunt the “soft on crime” or “too left” complaints.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      Dare I say the WH has learned & are going on the offense straight out the gate. The days of the bio in the WH announcement being enough are over. Particularly the closer we get to the election. I wish they had done this with Mangi but at least they seemed to have learned so better late than never.

      Liked by 1 person

  32. Dequan's avatar

    According to the article, a 2 for 1 deal was on the table for the three North Carolina vacancies. Two Democrats, Magistrate Judge David Keesler, & U.S. attorney Dena King. In exchange, Tillis & Budd would get Republican Magistrate Judge Susan C. Rodriguez. Sounds like a fair deal as long as Rodriguez is a moderate Republican. I don’t see any change at that deal this year after the Park nomination today. Hopefully it can be reached if Biden wins in November.

    Like

  36. Hank's avatar

    Interesting claim by Tillis/Budd out of the gate that Park doesn’t have the votes – I’ve been plenty critical of the WH Counsel, but I doubt even they are dumb enough to put a nominee on the floor that lacks the votes at all. The focus on how tough on crime Park is suggests to me that they’re catering to that spineless traitor Rosen.

    I’d also like to see liberal groups more proactively backing Park than they did with Mangi. Nevada has the third-highest percentage of Asian-American voters after Hawaii and California, and the campaigns put some effort into winning those voters in 22: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/04/us/nevada-asian-voters-midterms.html.

    Seems like Asian-American advocacy groups (and liberal groups more broadly) should be pointing out the bad optics of Rosen blocking not one but two historic Asian nominees if she tries to pull her BS again.

    Liked by 2 people

  37. tsb1991's avatar

    Senate Finance Committee has also posted a hearing next Wednesday for the remaining Tax Court nominees. Much faster turnaround time (nominated in May, hearing in July), than the first batch which was nominated in February.

    Nothing on the Homeland Security side for the DC Appeals Court nominees.

    Liked by 2 people

  38. Jamie's avatar

    As has said here before, Tillis and Budd are overstating the “promise” they got from a Democratic senator. It is the case that the senator promised Tillis that s/he would hear the arguments that Tillis and the White House about sufficient consultation and may withhold the vote until that has happened rather than a promise to vote no outright.

    As far as Park getting the endorsement of police orgs, he’s getting them because he successfully appealed and argued a ruling on a defendant who killed a police officer (as his job requires him to do). Don’t forget that many police orgs endorsed KBJ for SCOTUS too. There’s no likelihood that Park will be any more or less of a “tough on crime” judge.

    Liked by 3 people

  39. Jamie's avatar

    If Byron Conway is “right of center”, he sure has a weird way of showing it.

    https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Byron+Conway

    If Johnson really has approved this nomination, it is more likely due to the political circumstances. Johnson expects Baldwin to be reelected and Trump to win. There are two judges in their 80s on the federal bench in Wisconsin and if Johnson continues to block, Baldwin will return the favor in the future.

    Liked by 2 people

      • keystone's avatar

        As far as I can tell, Conway’s family is pretty well established in the Green Bay legal community. Both his grandfather and his uncle were Wood County Judges. His father (who passed away in 2017) was one of the founders of Conway, Olejniczak & Jerry (which is the largest law firm in the Green Bay area), was the youngest president of the Wisconsin state bar, and served on the Wisconsin Commission for Selection of Federal Judges. His father also seemed to be a big Dem.

        Conway, Olejniczak & Jerry did represent Trump in one of his lawsuits against Wisconsin and the 2020 election results. The firm seems to lean right. Byron Conway isn’t a part of it, nor is his deceased father. Maybe there’s still a relative there.

        After seeing this, I can kind of get a sense for how Conway’s connections may have help him navigate the tricky path of getting bipartisan support.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. It’s always tough when the name is more common. While Conway isn’t a super popular name, I could definitely see there being more than one who’s name would show up so that makes more sense. I couldn’t figure out any connection he would have to Abrams… Lol

        Like

  40. tsb1991's avatar

    Also didn’t know Durbin had a hip replacement surgery. Didn’t he have one at some point last year too? If it was done in late June at least there’s a week and a half head-start between then and the Senate returning. The Senate probably won’t be voting on any party-line nominations after Maldonado on Monday, but his absence could affect next week’s business meeting (I’m sure the question at that business meeting would which which nominees aren’t party-line votes at this point). If next week’s business meeting is cancelled, the next business meeting would be 7/25, where the nominees from 5/22, 6/5, and 6/20 are all voted out while the 7/10 nominees get held over (the 6/20 nominees should be held over at next week’s meeting).

    If further cloture motions are sent out for other judges on Monday for Wednesday votes, there’s still two local DC judges and three Tax Court judges if the Senate wanted to handle those.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Dequan's avatar

    With today’s nomination of Ryan Park, Biden has now nominated 22 of his 49 confirmed or pending circuit court nominees that was never previously a judge on any level before being nominated. I would say 23, but the argument was made that Jennifer Sung’s previous position should be considered a judicial role so ‘ll leave the count to 22.

    Park is the second solicitor general along with Toby Heytens. I believe he is the third college professor along with Anthony Johnstone & Embry Kidd.

    Like

  42. Mitch's avatar

    Are there any sports fans here? I ask because not long ago, Byron Conway represented James Starks of the Green Bay Packers, who suffered injuries that ended his football career after his car was hit by a semi-truck. I don’t know the dollar amount, but Starks got a good settlement.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      Thanks for the info @Ben.

      This is another reason why no matter how old Biden may be & act, I really hope Trump continues to Trump. That way voters can see the stark difference in our choices. I guess Joshua Kindred for a job offer soooo good, he couldn’t refuse it.

      The election will decide who replaces him as this seat obviously won’t get filled this term since Biden can’t fill the other vacancy. There’s no way even Sullivan could hold 2 of the states 3 seats vacant for another four years, so if Biden can win, he will get to fill both seats. Now that’s there are two vacancies, perhaps a package deal can be reached next year. Particularly with one of the vacancies being a Trump judge anyway, the second Trump judge to leave the bench now.

      Like

  44. Gavi's avatar

    Happy 4th of July, everyone. I love our country and I don’t mind saying it. Let’s hope I’ll still be able to hold my head high and say it for the next years to come.

    Now to the point of this comment: Thanks, Ben! I don’t think it’s medical disability-related. Maybe Kindred got a sweet high paying partnership outside of Alaska?

    It doesn’t matter, since Biden will not be able to fill this while the state has a senator named Sullivan. Trump will replace a Trump appointee. Besides death, how often does that happen? I’m sure it happens in a 2 term administration. But I wonder if a president ever replaces one of his judicial appointees all in a single term.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. aangren's avatar

    IF bud and tillis say they dont have they votes i take their word for it so that is now mangi, and this new nominee that has no shot to get confirmed. Spineless democrats. Can anyone show me a similar case where trump nominated some circuit court nominee from a state with two democrats who were against it and were so bold to even come out and say they couldnt have the vote to be confirmed because of assurances from the republican senator? It never happens the other way around, only one side is submissive and bows down and never fights.

    From the president to the senate,cowardice at their core and reverence for republican bad faith opinions rule the current day.

    Replace mangi nomination ASAP he has no shot of getting confirmed simply because republican senators dont like him and thus demcoratic senators agree to it.

    In janary when trump takes over it will be charlatan after charlatan federalist society goons like lawrence van dyke and you can bet your last dime that the GOP will ram them down and confirm swiftly regardless of the opposition from any democrats. One side brings a barrel the other brings a knife to the so called fight. Absolute joke

    Mangi, LIPEZ, now park three circuit nominees that have no chance of confirmation. Why? because republican senators say so.

    Like

  49. tsb1991's avatar

    I know there’s been a lot of takes about whether or not Biden should drop out from the race and who to replace him with, I’ve seen some people go as far as to call for his resignation to give Harris some incumbency. Biggest risk here is that the vice presidency would remain vacant, and apparently a replacement would require both House and Senate confirmation, not just the Senate. I would not put it past House Republicans to leave the vice presidency open for the rest of the year in such a scenario (also doing so would put Mike Johnson a heartbeat away from the presidency), but the biggest issue is that we’d lose a Senate tiebreaking vote, making any judicial nominee without Manchin’s support to be borderline impossible to confirm (imagine if the Senate was still 50-50, what happens to Senate control if it’s 50-50 and no vice president?)

    I get the urge to strangle people with takes like putting Sherrod Brown or Rafael Warnock onto a presidential ticket, apparently completely ignoring that a Republican governor would appoint their successors and throw away a valuable Senate seat from a difficult state to win (I mean, once Sherrod Brown’s seat flips it’s gone for a long time IMO, Warnock on the other hand a whole lot of blood and sweat was put into not just flipping that seat in 2021 for Senate control, but having to defend that seat again in 2022 for both a full six-year term and for a 51st Senate seat). Anyone Kemp appoints to Warnock’s seat gets some incumbency and Democrats probably don’t have another Warnock-caliber candidate in the wings in Georgia, making it much harder to flip that seat back, much less force a runoff.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jamie's avatar

      All of what you say is true… but Donald Trump could be an existential threat to the county and world, and when you look at things from those terms well it’s different. A few judges or losing a senator becomes less important when compared to preventing a second Trump Presidency.

      If I really thought Sherrod Brown or Warnock is so much better for defeating Trump than the alternatives, I’d do it. It’s just that I don’t believe that.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a reply to Lillie Cancel reply