Julia Lipez – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

The daughter of a prominent First Circuit Judge, Maine Superior Court Judge Julia Lipez is poised to take the seat that her father once held.

Background

The daughter of First Circuit Judge Kermit Victor Lipez, Julia Lipez received a B.A. magna cum laude from Amherst College in 2002 and her J.D., with distinction from Stanford Law School in 2006. After graduating, Lipez clerked for Judge Diana Gribbon Motz on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Lipez then joined the New York office of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (Wilmer Hale). Lipez then shifted to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maine, where she became Appellate Chief.

In 2022, Governor Janet Mills appointed Lipez to the Maine Superior Court, where she has served since.

History of the Seat

Lipez has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. If confirmed, Lipez would replace Judge William Kayatta, who will take senior status upon confirmation of a successor. Kayatta himself replaced Lipez’s father.

Legal Experience

After her clerkship, Lipez joined WilmerHale as an Associate, where she primarily worked on civil litigation. Notably, during this time, Lipez was part of the legal team representing the City of New Haven in the landmark Supreme Court case of Ricci v. DeStefano (the team was led by future federal judge Victor Bolden). See Ricci v DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009). In Ricci, the Supreme Court narrowly sided with the City in approving its use of eminent domain to seize land for economic development rather than direct public use. See id.

On the criminal side, Lipez, alongside former Solicitor General Seth Waxman and future federal judge Paul Engelmayer, represented Ronald Ferguson, the CEO of the General Reinsurance Corporation, alleging fraud and other offenses arising from the collapse of AIG. See United States v. Ferguson, 676 F.3d 260 (2d Cir. 2011).

From 2011 to 2022, Lipez served as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maine. Notably, Lipez served as the office’s Human Trafficking Coordinator between 2014 and 2022, and the office’s Appellate chief between 2015 and 2022. During this time, Lipez argued around 15 cases before the First Circuit and tried seven jury trials.

Notably, Lipez prosecuted David Miller for transporting his minor adopted daughter across state lines for criminal sexual activity. See United States v. Miller, 911 F.3d 638 (1st Cir. 2018). Lipez also successfully argued before the First Circuit (in a panel that included former Supreme Court Justice David Souter) to defend tax evasion and fraud convictions for a doctor who illegally documented and wrote off phony medical debt. See United States v. Sabean, 885 F.3d 27 (1st Cir. 2018).

Judicial Experience

Since 2022, Lipez has served as a judge on the Maine Superior Court, which is a trial court of general jurisdiction, but also oversees administrative appeals. During her time as a judge, Lipez has presided over 14 jury and seven bench trials.

Notably, Lipez affirmed a decision by Secretary of State Shanna Bellows to bar Chris Christie from the Maine Republican Presidential Primary ballot, finding that he had not submitted sufficient valid signatures for the ballot. See Susan Cover, Judge Upholds Decision to Leave Chris Christie Off Maine Ballot, Saying He Failed to Get Enough Signatures, Spectrum News, Dec. 22, 2023, https://spectrumlocalnews.com/me/maine/politics/2023/12/22/judge-upholds-decision-to-leave-chris-christie-off-maine-ballots.

Among other notable cases, Lipez denied motions to dismiss sexual assault charges against a defendant based on speedy trial and double jeopardy after his first jury deadlocked. See State v. Michaud, KENCD-CR-19-2763 (Me. Super. Ct.).

Writings

As a law student at Stanford, Lipez authored a paper discussing California’s programs to help ex-offenders return to the workforce after prison. See Julia Lipez, A Return to the “World of Work”: An Analysis of California’s Prison Job Training Programs and Statutory Barriers to Ex-Offender Employment, Crime and Punishment Policy: Reforming California Corrections, Jan. 27, 2006, available at https://law.stanford.edu/index.php?webauth-document=child-page/266901/doc/slspublic/JLipez_05.pdf. In the paper, Lipez outlines California’s current schemes but also posits that more assertive policy changes are necessary in California to ensure that ex-offenders are able to return to the workforce. Specifically, Lipez recommends increased training for offenders in the fields of carpentry, as well as in reception and clerical positions in offices. See id. at 41-42. Lipez argues that, improving employment prospects significantly cuts down on recidivism, making everyone safer. See id. at 45.

More recently, Lipez co-authored an article discussing strategies for prosecutors to develop a successful practice with human trafficking cases. See Kate Crisham and Julia Lipez, Developing a Successful Human Trafficking Practice, 70 Dep’t of Just. J. Fed. L. & Prac. 297 (2022).

Overall Assessment

With President Biden’s announcement that he will not be seeking re-election, he nonetheless can point to judges as one of the strongest accomplishments of his first term. This impact is likely to be strengthened by the confirmation of Lipez.

Setting aside her famous parentage, Lipez brings to her nomination extensive litigation experience on both the civil and criminal side, as well as appellate experience and time spent on the bench. As such, despite her youth, Lipez can certainly be deemed qualified for the bench. If confirmed, Lipez, as the youngest judge to join the First Circuit since Stephen Breyer in 1980, would likely play a significant role in shaping First Circuit jurisprudence.

135 Comments

  2. Anthony Myrlados's avatar

    In regards to David Hurd et al: I’m tired of judges rescinding vacancies because they don’t like their successors. It’s ridiculous. I think if a federal judge claims or plans to take senior status, the process should not be able to be reversed. Once you indicate interest in senior status, that plan is set in stone.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      As much as I despise David Hurd’s decision, I don’t agree with forcing such judges out. If I announced senior status and saw that a Chad Meredith type was nominated to replace me, I would rescind. Otherwise, announcing senior status becomes a pure gamble that the president will pick a like minded nominee who can get confirmed in time.

      Again, the president does not have to follow the wishes of the retiring judge, and can choose against giving them their desired successor at the expense of losing the vacancy. But making a rule against rescinding will make judges less likely to retire/go senior out of fear that the process could be botched, whether that be due to a time constraint, unconfirmable nominee, abrupt change in Senate composition, or unexpected blue slip. In particular, I’m thinking about judges who announced later such as James Wynn, Ilana Rovner, Charles Wilson, Jane Stranch, & Edward Davila, or red state Dem judges such as Max Cogburn & Dana Christensen.

      Liked by 1 person

    • tsb1991's avatar

      Pretty strange only one cloture motion was sent out, this would only cover two votes for Tuesday, unless the bill they’re working on now drags into Tuesday. The other thing for Tuesday is that there is one other Tax Court nominee and that State Dept. nominee whose cloture was invoked yesterday, their confirmation votes could be held Tuesday.

      Only other thing is if cloture on another bill is coming up after this vote? Although in that scenario, I think cloture would have been filed on it along with Neumann.

      Since we have that unicorn of the Senate working Monday next week, more cloture motions for Wednesday could go out then. Menendez didn’t show up all of this week, maybe he’ll show up as a final hurrah next week? A vote from a convicted felon is just as good as any other Senator’s vote, right?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Joe's avatar

      They are down a senator and likely don’t have the votes whipped right now. That’s the disadvantages of a 51-49 senate when two of your senators are independent.

      There is the possibility of further votes on Wednesday/Thursday. They may be waiting to see what attendance looks like Monday before they proceed.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. tsb1991's avatar

    The Senate Finance Committee also held their business meeting to vote out the next three Tax Court judges, Arbeit and Guilder were both unanimous votes, Fung was 19-8 (Grassley, Thune, Scott, Lankford, Daines, Barrasso, Johnson, and Blackburn all voted No, the Republican yes votes were Crapo, Cornyn, Cassidy, Young, and Tillis, Crapo for reference is the top Republican on Finance).

    Senate Homeland Security also held their hearing today for the two DC Appeals Court nominees, given the Trump assassination attempt briefing this morning, it was pretty empty to start out (Carper was at first the only Senator in attendance and opened the hearing in place of Gary Peters, the Committee chair). As far as I see no business meeting has yet to be posted for next week to vote out the latest batch of the local DC court judges, which was supposed to happen yesterday.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. keystone's avatar

    The Harris campaign announced an event in Atlanta next Tuesday. I’ve seen some speculation that this might be the Obama endorsement. Whether it is or isnt, I would t be surprised if Warnock and Ossoff join them and aren’t around for votes in that day.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. tsb1991's avatar

    Blumenthal wrapped up. Landy will be confirmed to the Tax Court on Monday, Neumann appears set to be confirmed on Tuesday, along with the passage of the bill the Senate invoked cloture on today. That would leave three votes for Tuesday, as I said there’s still a State Dept. nominee who can be confirmed as well, so a chance that’s fit into Tuesday (although the vote could be tight, the cloture vote was a party-line vote with Murkowski voting yes, so if attendance is dicey it’s not a total slam dunk).

    Liked by 1 person

  10. keystone's avatar

    @RyanJ

    One of the few district courts where a President Harris administration could make an impact is EDPA. Handful of GWB mainstream judges and Obama judges that are either already eligible or about to become eligible for senior status.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I know a lot of us focus on the 230 judges Trump put on the bench (Rightfully so). But let’s put it in perspective if we were to get a President Harris. Biden will likely come close to offsetting the 230 number. He will likely get close to 220ish. Trump was preceded by 8 years of Obama. So a Harris presidency would almost get the judiciary back in line by the end of 2028 with 16 of the last 20 years of Democrat picks.

      And that’s not taking into account the possibility of the additional judgeship bill that had been discussed. The sense map looks good for Democrats in 2026 (Yes I know it’s early). If this new found enthusiasm in the Harris led ticket can hold a 50/50 senate or even somehow flip Cruz and/or Scott in November, I think with the exception of the SCOTUS, 5th, 8th & some of the district courts, the judiciary would be in a good spot. With a little luck, maybe even some of the aforementioned courts could be in decent shape by 2029 as well.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ads's avatar

        Don’t forget DC Statehood and the 2 Dem Senators that would come from that. Schumer was entertaining that back in ’21 before Manchin quickly put the kibosh on it. But with him and Sinema gone, all we need is that majority vote in both houses folks. THAT would secure the Senate for the foreseeable future…as long as we keep it this year and assuming the House and President Harris of course.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Jamie's avatar

        Is Tester for DC Statehood? Not sure.
        But I’d expect the filibuster curtailed and three pieces of legislation to move quickly if the Dems hold the Senate (and win the House). Codifying abortion rights, a voting rights bill, and the Equality Act. All three have full support among the remaining Democrats in Congress. After that, we’ll see.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        OMG absolutely great point. I would actually put DC statehood ahead of Supreme Court reform. The best reform is making sure there is not a majority of senators that would ever vote for a Thomas or Alito ever again. It should have been done under Obama but I’ll take it under a President Harris.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. Zack's avatar

    I would say if Harris wins and we keep the Senate, not only will some of the remaining older liberal judges likely take senior status but (no good way to put it) father time will likely have a say for many of the older judges on circuit courts in active status, including the few remaining Reagan and George Sr. judges still in active service as well as Clinton judges like Robert King.
    So we will likely get some flips that way as well.
    Could easily flip the 7th and solidify control of the D.C. 4th, 9th Circuits due to that.
    Have to wait and see.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a reply to Rick Cancel reply