Judge Anthony Brindisi – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York

While comparatively uncommon, former members of the House of Representatives have, on occasion, been nominated to be federal judges. Former New York Congressman Anthony Brindisi is the first former member of the House to be nominated to the federal bench since James Rogan in 2007, and, if confirmed, would be the first on the bench since Judge William Martini was confirmed in 2002.

Background

Born November 22, 1978, in Utica, Anthony Joseph Brindisi got his Bachelor of Arts from Siena College in 2000 and went on to earn his J.D. from Albany Law School in 2004. After law school, Brindisi joined his father’s firm, Brindisi, Murad & Brindisi Pearlman. He continued to work there until his election to the U.S. House in 2018.

After leaving the House in 2021, Brindisi rejoined the firm. In 2022, he was appointed to the New York State Court of Claims, where he serves.

Brindisi also served in the New York State Assembly between 2011 and 2019, and in the U.S. House of Representatives between 2019 and 2021.

History of the Seat

Brindisi has been nominated to a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. This seat will be vacated when Judge David Hurd takes senior status. The Biden Administration previously appointed New York Assistant Attorney General Jorge Rodriguez to replace Hurd in 2022. However, Hurd took exception to the fact that Rodriguez was not based out of Utica and withdrew his intention to take senior status. In 2024, Hurd again indicated his willingness to take senior status upon confirmation of a successor.

Legal Experience

Between 2004 and 2018, and again from 2021 to 2022, Brindisi practiced law at his father’s firm in Utica. At the firm, Brindisi handled civil litigation, for example, representing the family of a girl struck by a motor vehicle in a suit against a municipality for failing to reduce speed limits or posting signs for children at play. See Dennis v. VanSteinburg, 2009 NY Slip Op (NY Appellate Div., 4th Dept. 2009). Brindisi’s work also encompassed appellate work, as well as trial level litigation. See, e.g., Scaparo v. Village of Ilion, 921 N.E.2d 590 (N.Y. App. 2009).

Jurisprudence

Brindisi has served as a judge on the New York State Court of Claims since Governor Kathy Hochul appointed him to the court in 2022. The New York Court of Claims is a specialized court that handles civil claims against the state and state agencies, where judges serve for nine year terms. Among the few opinions of Brindisi that are available for review, he granted a motion to dismiss claims arising from alleged sexual abuse suffered by the plaintiff in a correctional institution. See RS v. State of New York, 2024 Slip Op. 50859 (NY: Court of Claims 2024). In the opinion, Brindisi found that the claims were barred as untimely as they were served outside the one-year window that New York law permitted. See id. Brindisi noted that he was “sympathetic to claimant” but lacked the discretion under the law to waive the jurisdictional requirements of the law. See id.

Political Activity

Unlike most judicial nominees, Brindisi has an extensive political history, to include a list of public statements on most issues that is too long to detail here. A summary of Brindisi’s political history is below.

From 2011 to 2018, Brindisi served in the New York State Assembly, which is the lower house of the legislature. In this position, Brindisi generally earned a reputation as a moderate, For example, Brindisi described himself as a “strong supporter of the Second Amendment” and opposed the New York Securing Ammunitions and Firearms Act, criticizing the law for a lack of due process. See NY-22 Minute: Brindisi Questioned on Gun Policy By Luke Perry, Utica University Center of Public Affairs and Election Research, Mar. 9, 2018, https://www.ucpublicaffairs.com/home/2018/3/9/ny-22-minute-brindisi-questioned-on-gun-policy-by-luke-perry.

From 2019 to 2021, Brindisi served in the U.S. House. Notably, while in the House, Brindisi voted to impeach former President Donald Trump on both counts in 2019. See Mark Weiner, Rep. John Katko, Anthony Brindisi Split on Trump Impeachment Vote, Syracuse.com, Dec. 18, 2019, https://www.syracuse.com/news/2019/12/rep-john-katko-anthony-brindisi-split-on-trump-impeachment-vote.html. Brindisi subsequently lost his re-election in 2020 by a razor thin margin.

In 2021, Brindisi ran for a seat on the New York State Supreme Court, losing to Syracuse attorney Danielle Fogel, who was a childhood friend of Brindisi’s. See Douglass Dowty, Syracuse Lawyer Fogel Wins ‘Dream Job’ on State Supreme Court Against Ex-Congressman Brindisi, Syracuse.com, Nov. 2, 2021, https://www.syracuse.com/politics/2021/11/syracuse-lawyer-fogel-wins-dream-job-on-state-supreme-court-against-ex-congressman-brindisi.html.

Overall Assessment

The last two ex-Congressmen to be nominated for the federal bench had very different trajectories onto the bench. Martini was confirmed comfortably with no controversy, while Rogan’s nomination stalled due to the lack of support of his home state senator.

For his part, Brindisi’s path of the bench is likely to track in between the previous two. He is expected to get a hearing. However, such a hearing is likely to draw significant questioning based on his political stances. Given the rapidly closing window for judicial confirmations, it remains to be seen if Brindisi will be confirmed in time.

709 Comments

  1. Dequan's avatar

    We discussed him to be the most likely nominee for this seat. While I would have preferred Jorge Rodriguez, I’ll just be happy to get judge Hurd off the bench. I look forward to this confirmation in the lame duck.

    Like

  2. Dequan's avatar

    Fun fact… I met judge William Martini in 2016. He was flying out of the West Palm Beach airport. When I saw his last name (I was checking him in) I asked him if he was the New Jersey federal judge. He couldn’t believe I knew who he was.

    We spoke for about 5 minutes. I asked him if he thought Julian Neals would get confirmed. He said yes, if not that year, later but definitely yes. After President Biden won he renominated him for Martini’s seat which he was eventually confirmed for.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Ethan's avatar

    So, here’s all the circuit judges that become eligible for senior status in the next presidential term (source, not made by me: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vLehSIr2HZItgjLfpQ56U0ceUoitfHgMzO-r0-akU0E/edit?usp=sharing).

    Appointed by Trump:

    * Judge Kurt Engelhardt (5th circuit): 4/21/2025

    * Judge Mark Bennett (9th circuit): 7/13/2028

    Appointed by Obama:

    * Judge Richard Taranto (Federal circuit): 5/6/2025

    * Judge Mary Murguia (9th circuit): 9/6/2025

    * Judge Albert Diaz (4th circuit): 12/31/2025

    * Judge Carolyn McHugh (10th circuit): 3/14/2026

    * Judge Robert Bacharach (10th circuit): 5/20/2026

    * Judge Stephen Higginson (5th circuit): 11/2/2026

    * Judge Adalberto Jordan (11th circuit): 12/7/2026

    * Judge L. Felipe Restrepo (3rd circuit): 12/31/2026

    * Judge Morgan Christen (9th circuit): 1/11/2027

    * Judge Gregory Phillips (10th circuit): 7/9/2027

    * Judge Patty Shwartz (3rd circuit): 7/24/2027

    * Judge Nancy Moritz (10th circuit): 7/29/2027

    * Judge Cornelia Pillard (DC circuit): 12/17/2027

    * Judge Pamela Harris (4th circuit): 9/23/2028

    * Judge Robert Wilkins (DC circuit): 10/2/2028

    * Judge Patricia Millett (DC circuit): 12/10/2028

    Appointed by G.W. Bush:

    * Judge Jeffrey Sutton (6th circuit): 10/31/2025

    * Judge Jerome Holmes (10th circuit): 11/18/2026

    * Judge William Pryor (11th circuit): 4/26/2027

    * Judge Michael Chagares (3rd circuit): 5/1/2027

    * Judge Steven Colloton (8th circuit): 1/9/2028

    * Judge Raymond Gruender (8th circuit): 7/5/2028

    * Judge Catharina Haynes (5th circuit): 11/9/2028

    Liked by 4 people

  4. Zack's avatar

    Been waiting for this one.
    I’m originally from this area and I’ve long thought because of his political and legal ties to the area that Brindisi was going to be the nominee for this seat.
    Even when he wasn’t named and Jorge Rodriguez was, it wouldn’t have been an issue if Rodriguez had been from the Utica area.
    He wasn’t and that doomed him.
    It’s understandable to think racism was involved but this is a case where regional politics came into play more then anything else, with a nominee caught in the middle.
    They may be in the same district but there is a deep distrust of the Albany region from folks in the Utica/Upstate NY area who have felt that Albany/NYC Democrats are happy to cut any and all programs& funding etc. and anything else that benefits this area in favor of them and that includes the federal courthouse, which was rumored to be on the chopping block and that is felt by both parties.
    It’s why assurances that Rodriguez would move to Utica fell on deaf ears, no one in the area bought that, including Judge Hurd.
    It’s why he took took back his senior status because in his mind (and the minds of many in the area) doing that meant the rumored shut down wouldn’t happen (not true, Congress could still shut it down.)
    Having said that, it worked.
    The courthouse not only didn’t show down, it got renovations and also got a nominee with long standing ties to the area, one whom is supported by many on both sides of the aisle in the area.
    Having said all that, I still don’t like how this went down.
    Rodriguez should have had his shot at being a judge and didn’t deserve to lose that chance because of politics and a judge having a temper tantrum.
    Also, Brindisi will be a party line lame duck confirmation but he will be confirmed, Schumer isn’t going to let a vacancy in his state go unfilled.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Zack's avatar

        @Ryan J

        There was some issue with a lawsuit he was involved in that came up that might hurt his chances but yes, I could see someone from another area getting this seat, as Glenn Suddaby’s senior status isn’t based on confirmation of a successor so he could very well get another chance.
        Have to wait and see.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Rodriguez had had a legal issue since he was nominated. As much as I love the idea of waiting two weeks until Glenn Suddaby officially stores down to nominate Jorge Rodriguez, no way Schumer & Biden would tier that chance with lame duck confirmation or bust. Particularly when the legal issues involved a rebuke from the chief judge of the very court the vacancy is on. Sucks because Rodriguez checked so many boxes. A young, progressive, Hispanic attorney in upstate New York. I doubt we will get another for the vacancy pending sadly.

        Like

    • lilee2122's avatar

      Utica and NDNY are more a MAGA area then cities Albany or Syracuse and their counties… Hence the Maga foolery with district 24 Tenney vs Brindisi in the courts few years ago.. And hence the newest election district boundaries have Maga voters in the Utica and NDNY area now as district 22 to negate all of syracuse voters who vote Dem….

      Liked by 1 person

    • lilee2122's avatar

      I also want to add we have to get Democrat judges into the Utica and Syracuse seats if at all possible.. Rep Stefanik in the Northern NY is busy plotting untruths and manipulations to try to turn district 24 and 22 democrat cities into MAGA GOP represented… I actually like our last GOP Rep Katko but the bipartisan nominees have given way to power hungry my way or the highway parts of the gop in several areas of our country last several years…

      Liked by 1 person

    • lilee2122's avatar

      I gotten more vocal this past year..I’ve seen too many radical gop judges uneducated in the Constitution driven by their own personal leanings and backwards ideologies to the detriment of every day people…And when they took away every woman’s rights they finally succeeded in poking a sleeping bear now waking up…

      Liked by 3 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      I am less confident about these then past but I’ll give my guesses;

      3rd – Christopher Howland (born c. 1980)

      SDCA – Jose Castillo (born c. 1978)

      NYND – This is the toughest one for me to guess. I’ll say Thomas Sutcliffe (born c. 1984)

      AZ – Justin Pidot (born c. 1977)

      NM – Aja Brooks (born c. 1983)

      But again I’m less sure about this batch then most previous for several reason. One, so close to the election, Biden is likely to be more careful with picks because there’s no second chance should a nominee fail for him to get somebody confirmed before he leaves office. Second, the New Mexico judge is a Republican appointee & his date to leave is after the inauguration. So they may be more careful with that circumstance.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Zack's avatar

    @Dequan.
    I agree, I still think  Christopher Howland (or someone else) gets the nod for the 3rd Circuit because I don’t see Biden letting a chance to get a flip in his own backyard go to waste but other seats…not so much.
    Have to wait and see.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jamie's avatar

      Doesn’t Howland have a liberal background and is a ACS member? He also doesn’t seem to have worked in Delaware for a while, but that’s not a big problem. Howland would be a party line vote, which would be fine if nominated six months ago. It’s more problematic now.

      The safe choice for the 3rd is Judge Jennifer Hall. But Biden has eschewed safe choices for almost all the circuit court nominees this year, so Howland would fit with that.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        Jenifer Hall or Gregory Williams would need to have their district court seats backfilled. There isn’t enough time for Biden to do that. If Biden wanted to go all in & nominate somebody he’s close with, I think my second choice Alexander Mackler (c. 1983) would fit the bill.

        Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        Possibly, but his resume is solid. Mackler has been chief deputy attorney general for the Delaware department of justice, deputy chief of staff for US Senator Kaufman, deputy counsel to VP Biden & campaign manager for his son when he was attorney general of Delaware.

        Baring any elevation or major surprise vacancy, this will be the last crack at a circuit court judge for Delaware for decades. I can see Biden taking a chance on somebody he’s close to regardless of the ABA, particularly in the lame duck.

        Like

  12. Zack's avatar

    IMO, there is no safe nominee for this seat because it’s going to be a flip of someone, who while not a flame breathing conservative like Alito/James Ho etc. is no liberal like Judge Rovner or a package deal like Helene White was.
    Kent Jordan is a conservative jurist and if his seat flips and Mangi gets confirmed, we will have a liberal/moderate majority on the 3rd Circuit.
    I expect Republicans to go all out to stop that.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Zack's avatar

    @Jamie
    Nancy Maldonado was confirmed with bipartisan votes for her district court seat yet when it came time for her to be elevated to the 7th Circuit, she was hit with smears and was a party line vote.
    Kevin Ritz, a moderate Democrat who is an AUSA attorney was treated to the same garbage etc.
    At best, your scenario where some GOP Senators might not show up if she’s the nominee is the only one that will happen, she is not going to get any Republican votes, including Murkowski/Collins.
    Which is why Biden should go for one of the names mentioned, especially since Hall’s seat being vacant would lead to a judicial emergency almost immediately.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Gavi's avatar

      @Zack

      It’s rare, but I agree with you here. I’m astounded that folks still think Republicans are in the business of voting for Dem judicial nominees, let alone a circuit court nominee that flips the seat this close to a presidential election. Any one of those conditions in that sentence would greatly winnow Republican support. But all at once? Not even Collins would support.

      NO WAY would Biden and Schumer sit on the Mangi nomination if they didn’t have a plan to confirm him by the lame duck. It would be such an absolute political malpractice, when they could have named and confirmed a replacement months ago. I think I’ve been the person who’s the least smitten by Dems (ability, strategy, priority, etc.) on the judiciary in here, but not even I can imagine Dems making such a disastrous mistake on this seat. The idea that Dems would wait till after the election to try for a new nominee is quite an extraordinary take.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I 100% agree with @Gavi here. As much as I have expressed doubt in Schumer & Durbin at times, I can’t imagine there’s not a plan to confirm Mangi in the lame duck. Either they plan on sending the Nevada senators & Manchin on an all expenses paid trip somewhere far from DC or wait for Republicans to skip town. But as @Gavi said, not even Schumer & Durbin on their worst day would let a circuit court seat go the way some in here are suggesting.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Joe's avatar

        I agree, Gavi. There’s no way there isn’t a backup plan to confirm Mangi. Rosen, Tester, Brown, and others will all either be freshly re elected or on their way out of office. In either case, they will be more or less free to vote how they desire. My guess is Rosen will meet with Mangi (as many other senators have done with nominees in the past) and suddenly her concerns will be assuaged.

        As for Manchin and/or Sinema, if they can’t be convinced there’s always the possibility that they will coincidentally have early/late flights the days of the votes and will unable to vote either way. It’s been done before. Manchin in particular may want an administration job or ambassadorship and may be in the mood to play nice again.

        Liked by 4 people

    • keystone's avatar

      Yeah. The Suddaby and Jordan seats are still relatively fresh. That Arizona seat has been out there for a while. The application process ended Oct 31, 2023 and there hasn’t been any indication of the Senators starting a new review process. It be great the Arizona seat in progress to try and get a judge in that swing states ahead of the election.

      Part of me wonders if Sinema is intentionally dragging her feet on this. But I am comforted in knowing that she’d prob rather control naming the nominee rather than letting Ruben Gallego get the opportunity to do so.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Without a new batch this week, I guess we can clinch the next batch (Whenever it is announced) will be the last under Biden. Looking at the schedule, here is the path to confirmation before the end of the year;

        SJC hearing – November 13th

        SJC vote held over – November 20

        SJC vote to the floor – December 4th

        Vote to confirm all nominees in the next batch – December 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18 & 19

        Like

  17. Joe's avatar

    Kent Jordan has been nearly 4 months now…in a state like Delaware that should be plenty of time I would think.

    Arizona has had their process already as Keystone said.

    CD Cal has been 4 months

    SD Cal has been nearly a year

    ND NY has indeed only been a month, so I can understand that one. I do ultimately expect a nominee, but it may be later.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Ryan J's avatar

    A little disappointed that there’s no California nominees. I wonder whether they are making the extremely risky choice of not naming nominees in hopes that Kamala Harris will get to fill the seats (even if all these seats are filled, I guarantee there will be new vacancies in California for her to fill if she wins)

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I doubt that. No way they would risk the election (President or senate), particularly since just about anybody Butler would recommend would be just as, if not much better than anybody Schiff would recommend. Plus, as you said California will always have a ton of new vacancies over a 4-year period. I just think they are particularly slow with recommendations from California.

      Liked by 1 person

  20. tsb1991's avatar

    Glad to see we did get nominees, I was more curious than nervous about the late announcement since it’s not like anything else was really released on the Briefing Room page that day and we were getting everything but judicial nominees, it was pretty quiet on that front.

    Was really hoping we’d get that 3rd Circuit nominee. There are three possible hearing slots left but the 11/13 hearing would be the only one where there’s any realistic path to confirmation before the end of the year. The December hearing slots IMO could be used if Harris wins with a Democratic Senate, if Biden nominates people for those slots you could still use them as hearings and get them ready for a committee vote in the next Congress, and give Harris a headstart on nominees (as I’ve talked about in earlier posts). I think an even better scenario is if he were to keep announcing nominees through the end of the year and fill in hearing slots early on next year, since a new President typically doesn’t nominate judges until maybe the spring of their first year (although the SJC hearing slots early next year would largely be for cabinet appointments, if anything).

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Ben's avatar

    Great to see nominees today. John Doe on Twitter has shared two interesting tidbits. Sharad Desai is Roopali Desai’s brother. And apparently the NM judge has changed his senior status date to upon confirmation of his successor, so that’s good for Davenport’s chances.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      @Ben

      Thanks as always for the great bit of info. I know it was too much of a coincidence two Biden nominees had the same last name of Desai in a state with an average population of Arizona & they weren’t related. @Ethan & I were just talking offline & he looked up his donations. ALL to Democrats. The usual suspects such as Sinema & Kelly but also Warnock, Ossoff & Fair Fight. He seems to be more of a stealth liberal than his sister, but he will be the youngest member on the court so I’ll definitely take it.

      Let’s hope this brother & sister tandem works out better than the last. The last time we had a brother & sister on the federal bench, the brother had to resign due to sexual harassment allegations & it allowed Trump to put a conservative 45-year-old Solicitor General of Kansas to replace him.

      Great news on William Johnson as well. I feel a lot better knowing he will be leaving the bench upon confirmation of his successor than after inauguration day.

      Like

  22. Zack's avatar

    While I’m happy with the new nominees we got, I wish we had gotten the 3rd Circuit vacancy as well.
    The issue might be that Kent Jordan isn’t leaving until January 15th so it might be they’re afraid that if Harris doesn’t win, Trump can refuse to sign the new nomination’s commission and that will be that.
    Still would like to cross that bridge when it comes.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Inauguration Day isn’t until January 20, 2025. Joe Biden will still be President on January 15, 2025. He would have over 4 days to sign the commission of whoever is confirmed to replace Jordan after he stepped down. As we saw in the case of Nicole Berner, Biden can easily sign the commission the exact same day of confirmation if he wanted to, so 4 days would be more than enough time to sign it.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. keystone's avatar

    Looking at Roopali Desai’s SJQ –

    My brother is Vice President and General Counsel of integrated Supply Chain at Honeywell Aerospace… If confirmed, I would strictly follow the Code of Conduct
    for United States Judges and all other applicable rules and ethical canons governing recusal if any cases involving those entities came before me.”

    I’m actually surprised that they’d allow her brother to be appointed to a court that reports into her circuit.

    I know that there were a lot of instances in the ’90’s of close relations on courts – William and Betty Fletcher (mother and son), J. Frederick Motz and Dianna Gibbon Motz (husband and wife), Stephen Breyer and Charles Breyer (Brothers), Carolyn Dineen King and Thomas Reavley (husband and wife) and Congress passed a law in ’98 saying “No person may be appointed to the position of judge of a court exercising judicial power under article III of the United States Constitution (other than the Supreme Court) who is related by affinity or consanguinity within the degree of first cousin to any judge who is a member of the same court.” 

    I not sure how this is gonna be allowed.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Ethan's avatar

    None of them were on my radar. Davenport is now the fourth line AUSA (after Jamar Walker in EDVA, Robert White in EDMI, and Tiffany Johnson in NDGA) nominated to the bench by Biden. I believe all others held some form of leadership position in their respective office.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Dequan's avatar

    It appears I got Word Pressed. I will just write what I wrote without the links included…

    While we are on the subject of families, it appears US Attorney Chris Kavanaugh will be resigning now that his wife Jasmine Yoon has been confirmed to the WDVA.

    Also, here is a good read from Davis Lat. I believe he has commented on this blog in the past as well.

    Like

  28. Zack's avatar

    @Dequan, got ya.
    Given that, wonder why there was no nominee for the 3rd Circuit, maybe they’re saving him or her for down the line.
    As for Elizabeth C. Coombe being nominated for the NDNY, I get why she was the choice (longtime chief of the criminal division of NDNY) but I was hoping for some of the other names that had been floated around and that I heard of, especially since some were more liberal and younger.
    Have to say with all the nominees we’ve now gotten, I expect Sharad Desai and Anthony Brindisi to draw most of the fire, the former for his sister and the latter for his time in office as well as the lawsuit (there WERE issues in the Oswego county clerk’s office) he filed in the election he ultimately lost.
    Won’t have long to find out.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I wouldn’t be too worried about the 3rd. Schumer would get that nominee confirmed on Christmas Eve if necessary just to make sure Biden gets to sign his commission. Here is the timeline from nomination to confirmation for the other three Delaware nominees just to show how fast tracked they have been;

      Tamika Montgomery-Reeves: June 29, 2022 – December 12, 2022 (167 days)

      Gregory Williams: April 13, 2022 – July 20, 2022 (98 days)

      Jennifer Hall: June 28, 2023 – October 17, 2023 (111 days)

      The last day of the senate in session for this year is December 19th. September 12th would mark 98 days before December 19th. I think If we see a nominee anywhere near the middle of September, you can expect them to be fast tracked along the Gregory Williams timeline.

      Liked by 1 person

    • keystone's avatar

      I actually suspect Desai won’t have too hard of a time. Like her or hate her, Sinema has good relationships across the aisle. I have to imagine that she’ll be able to talk Manchin, Murkowski, Collins, and Romney into voting for her nominee.. and, if she is indeed the senator that Tillis was referencing, him too.

      I am a little worried about the remaining California noms bc they are gonna be at the very bottom of a long list and California already has a lot of noms that require party line votes.

      Liked by 2 people

  29. Mike's avatar

    Two federal prosecutors and a corporate general counsel, Biden White House has entered the “just get someone confirmed” phase which is fine I guess. These will get the usual GOP votes of support.

    At this point, unless there’s a miracle in Montana, they’re gonna lose the senate. I’m pretty sure the GOP senate will want the same deal they had with Obama for confirmations which was a 1 for 1 or even 1 for 2 deal.

    I’m fine with that if all the vacancies a Harris WH would fill are red state ones because that’ll still get you a net gain in all these red states for every 2 vacancies they fill but that all falls apart if the Senate Dems do not confirm the now 36 nominees almost all from blue states.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Lillie's avatar

    Something to consider with the Desai siblings is that since the 9th circuit does en banc panels of 10 judges plus chief it is easier for her to recuse/not participate.

    I’m wondering if that’s what some of the delay in the release of the nom was? Like if they got some clearance from SCOTUS or something.

    Liked by 3 people

  31. star0garnet's avatar

    I too am quite happy about the change in status for NM; I wonder if that’s a direct indication that Johnson likes Davenport. Coombe either has one of the senators squarely in her corner, or Suddaby is going senior on condition of naming his successor. She gains the distinction of being the only blue state Biden nominee with a purely GOP donation history. Admittedly, that’s a single $250 gift to Katko in 2014, so it may not reveal much about her. It still says something.

    Was hoping for a bigger batch, but I’ll certainly be looking for at least 5 in the October 16 batch:
    SD CA vice Curiel we guessed that the senators’ recs were insufficient in January when just Kanter was announced
    SD CA vice Hayes we guessed at Kanter’s issues in February
    CD CA vice Carney we learned of in February
    3rd Cir vice Jordan we learned of in May
    SD NY vice Schofield we learned of Netburn’s rejection in July

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Zack's avatar

    I’m pretty sure that Coombe will be staying in Albany so Syracuse will be losing a duty station but unlike Judge Hurd, Glenn Suddaby isn’t going to care (most judges don’t) so he’s not taking back his senior status.
    As for why Gillibrand, it’s not just the fact they likely know each other very well, Coombe broke a lot of barriers during her tenure in the NDNY attorney’s office and that is the kind of thing that appeals to her.
    Her age and her donation to John Katko (the Susan Collins of the House until he retired) aren’t going to matter to her as much as it does to us.
    Not happy about this pick since it will likely cost Syracuse a seat but she’s not a closet Federalist Society member and is replacing one who is, about the only good thing about it.

    Liked by 2 people

  33. Mike's avatar

    Anyone else have a sinking feeling that there’s no way they’re going to confirm 3 dozen nominees in the time that’s left?

    This feeling is made worse by the knowledge that if McConnell was in the same situation, I know for a fact he’d be able to do it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I honestly think it will depend on the election. If Dems somehow hold the senate, they won’t rush to confirm everybody. If they lose the senate, I think you will see a rush to certainly confirm all of the circuit court & blue state district court nominees. They will probably put bipartisan nominees like Conway on the back burner until next year.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Thomas's avatar

        I strongly disagree with that. There are just five judges at the Eastern District of Wisconsin, and two of them are more than eighty years old, additionally that is the longest open vacancy to date.

        At these unstable courts, who have a high number of vacancies, an old bench or both of that, I think those replacements are prioritized by the Senate, what I think is right.

        Beside the latter one, I would count the District of Vermont, because half of the bench is empty, the Northern District of New York, who has just stabilized after the confirmation of Anne Nardacci, before that, the position was open for more than six years, and Sannes became chief judge just in time before reaching the age limit of 65 as youngest judge that time after Suddaby’s term ended. So I see urgency here to fill the two posts before the other two might also leave without knowledge, if and when new judges can be confirmed, likely not in the first half of 2025 no matter who will win in November.

        And the last one I acutally see, is the Central District of California, much bigger in size, but with seven judges who are 75 and older, there also can appear a sudden and massive loss at a court, which is busy and understaffed so far.

        The other ones might last some time with one or two vacancies, there are surely a lot more with two GOP senators, and who are judicial emergencies, but it is not realistic to see progress there until the end of the year.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        There are only 3 weeks the senate is in session before the election. Conway hasn’t been voted out of the SJC yet so week one of the three is already shot. Very rarely does a nominee get voted out of the SJC one week & confirm e the next so unless they are on a KBJ timeline (Which I doubt the will be for Conway), that just leaves the third week.

        We haven’t even gotten to the budget yet nor circuit court nominees pending so I just don’t see Conway getting confirmed before the election. That leads to my scenario. If Dems lose the senate, I just don’t see why you would waste senate floor time on a nominee that could be confirmed under a Republican majority over confirming party line nominees would will only be confirmed under a Democrat majority while you still have one. It of course hopefully Dems can pull off another senate miracle & the scenario will be a moot point.

        Like

    • Joe's avatar

      Mike, with the exception of Mangi, Park, and the vacancies without nominees I feel very good about everyone being confirmed by the end of the year.

      If they don’t get through a significant batch of them when they get back in September then maybe it’ll be time to panic.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Gavi's avatar

      It was a good day for the Desai family when Roopali Desai decided to throw in her lot with an improbable US senator candidate who was thought to be the future of the Democratic Party, if she won her seat.

      As we say good riddance to one, we say welcome to the Desais. Too bad Arizona doesn’t have another district court for the other sister. Or maybe we can just send Roopali to SCOTUS and replace her on the 9th with Shefali Milczarek-Desai.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        I noticed that as well. Shefali Milczarek-Desai would be an A+ just like her sister (And her brother isn’t too far behind). I know there has never been three siblings on the federal bench at the same time. This would be a great family to make history with. I wish she moved to another state like California where it would make it more likely to happen. But for now, I’m happy with sister & brother on the bench.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      The rule of “no relatives can serve on the same court together” is subjective to selective enforcement depending on who’s in power. As someone else has mentioned, there are multiple examples of relatives on the same court or a court that appeals to another.

      In the case of the Fletchers, the Republicans selectively enforced the rule so that Slade Gorton could give Richard Tallman a spot. On the 5th circuit, Reavley and King first met when they had confirmation hearings the same day, and did not marry until they had been on the bench for 25 years.

      One thing’s for sure; if Matthew Kacsmaryk or Jim Ho had a relative who was equally extreme as them, a Republican president and Senate would not let this rule get in the way of appointing them to the bench.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Gavi's avatar

        @Ryan

        Your timeline is off. Can you name a single instance when this law was not enforced since its 1998 enactment?

        The Fletchers and the Reavleys do not count under the law: “This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act and shall apply only to any individual whose nomination is submitted to the Senate *on or after* such date.”

        The date of enactment was October 1998. William Fletcher was nominated twice years before the law. and the Reavleys were already serving when they got married.

        Orrin Hatch hated Betty Fletcher and saw the nomination of her son as an opportunity to get rid of her. And for that, he recruited the help of Slade Gorton, who’d get a say in her replacement. Hatch tried to misapply the original 1911 law to prevent William from joining the court while his mother, who again, was the real target, was serving on the same court.

        Hatch and some of the Republicans finally relented after the 1998 law amended the 1911 law to specifically prevent a judge from joining the same court as a close relative/spouse AND with the assurance from Mother Fletcher that she’d assume senior status upon the confirmation and appointment of her son, which she did. However, Betty outsmarted them by retaining a full caseload for much of her time in senior status.

        Since then, there’s never been an instance when an appointment contravened the law or needed to be “subjective to selective enforcement.” If you can find one, please let me know.

        Liked by 2 people

  35. Zack's avatar

    @Gavi,
    I’m glad Betty Flecther got to enjoy a full caseload while on senior status but at the end of the day, Orrin Hatch got what he wanted, a flip of a liberal jurist’s seat to a conservative one in Richard Talman.
    Talman taking senior status under Trump continues to ensure a seat once held by a liberal will be held by a conservative jurist for the next 25-30 years and also ensure that if Trump wins again, the narrowing of the liberal majority that started under George W and Trump’s first term will only get worse.
    I just can’t consider that a victory in the grand scheme of things.

    Liked by 2 people

  37. joeyfalconi's avatar

    That 3rd circuit vacancy is a puzzle.  Sure, Schumer can always prioritize it in the lame duck.  The question remains, why wait?

    There’s a few possibilities.  First, they still trying to find the perfect nominee. 

    Second, they plan to announce the nomination closer to the election for max political value. 

    Third, they want to nominate someone very liberal and don’t want to force Tester to vote for a very liberal nominee just before the election.

    I’m leaning toward #3.

    Liked by 1 person

    • keystone's avatar

      I lean towards a 4th possibility. The timing of this last round of nominees was kinda weird. It came out really late in the day, so late that pretty much everyone on here had written off the possibility of getting a list. Part of me wonders if there’s a 3C nominee and WH is awaiting a piece of the background check to come back. They may have delayed the announcement bc they thought there was a chance the final component would come in that day, but it ultimately didn’t and they had to get the announcement to meet a deadline.

      I’m just basing this off of vibes so just a theory.

      Liked by 1 person

  38. Zack's avatar

    You wonder if they’re worried if they nominate someone who’s too liberal that Judge Jordan might take back his retirement plans?
    Maybe that’s the delay.
    Or as Joey suggested, it’s because it’s someone they don’t want senators to take heat over before the general.
    We’ll know soon enough, as there is no way Biden is going to let a chance to fill a vacancy from his state go unfilled.

    Liked by 2 people

  39. Ryan J's avatar

    The 5th circuit goes en banc a lot. I’ve viewed a couple recent en banc rulings, including one on Thursday where the 5th circuit dissolved a consent decree that ensured that Louisiana was compliant with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The vote was 11-7 with Wiener, Haynes, and all 5 Dem appointees dissenting.

    I’ve seen enough en banc cases from the 5th that I think I can order all the judges (including senior judges) by ideology

    From most liberal to most conservative:
    Dennis, Douglas, Graves, King, Stewart, Ramirez, Higginson, Wiener, Higginbotham, Haynes, Southwick, Davis, Jolly, Richman, Barksdale, Clement, Engelhardt, Willett, Wilson, Elrod, Smith, Oldham, Duncan, Jones, Ho

    I read the article that someone posted a few days ago and it’s crazy that Edith Jones is now out-crazied by Jim Ho. The far right now holds 9 out of the 17 seats on the 5th circuit (Engelhardt and everyone to his right); senior judges are keeping the court in check and can sit en banc if they are on the original panel, but the crazies of the court almost always reverse any good ruling that the court makes.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. Zack's avatar

    Yea..there’s a reason I never celebrate any liberal/moderate ruling on the 5th Circuit and haven’t ever since George W’s picks were put on it.
    Because any decent ruling will get reversed before you can blink.
    About the only difference between Edith Jones and James Ho in their craziness is the fact that back in the early 90’s, her reputation was so bad George Sr got told not to even think of nominating her for SCOTUS or she’d be blocked.
    That wouldn’t happen today.
    James Ho will have an easy path to confirmation to SCOTUS if Trump wins and Republicans get the senate.
    Let’s hope that won’t happen.

    Liked by 2 people

    • IrvineOnlooker's avatar

      A lot of inaccuracies in that article.

      #1. It quotes Carrie Severino- a far-right, bad-faith conservative commentator- I disregard anything this lady says

      #2. The article claims Trump “flipped the 11th, 2nd, and 3rd circuits” – the 11th Circuit might have had a D-appointee majority (Hull and Marcus are DINOs and very conserative), but functionally it has ALWAYS operated as a 7-5 conservative-liberal court. The 2nd Circuit has flipped back under Biden, and the 3rd Circuit (if Mangi/replacement is confirmed), will flip back as well

      Liked by 1 person

  43. Rick's avatar

    With the senate back next Mon, perhaps at some point this week Schumer will pen the Dear colleague letter this week outlining the schedule for the upcoming 3 weeks that they are in. And hopefully we’ll have a new NJ senator on Sept 9th around 3pm ?

    Liked by 1 person

  44. Dequan's avatar

    I am not sure if we have discussed this, but here is a Fox News list of possible SCOTUS nominees in a second Trump term. Some of them have never been a judge on any level but of course they would be prime targets for appeal court vacancies with the exception of senators Cotton & Lee. Scary list indeed. Funny to see one of the names mentioned volunteered for Joe Biden’s 1988 presidential candidacy – “stuffing envelopes, making phone calls,”. I doubt Trump knew that… Lol

    (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/potential-candidates-supreme-court-under-second-donald-trump-term)

    Like

      • Thomas's avatar

        More a symbol of the result of the missing of mandatory retirement ages and term limits as well.

        Nobody could expected that she would be in office forty years on her confirmation at the age of 56 years.

        Although there were few women serving as attorneys that time, and though growing lifespan I expect, that her case is relatively unique, because she’s also so much older than all the other active judges, whom none of them have so far passed the age of Ninty.

        Purely rational, not much will change, when she’s gone one time, there will be a successor, the number of active Reagan-appointees will drop from 5 to 4, who are all comparatively younger and until the last one will leave, a decade or two will pass, the longest serving appeals court judge will be roughly half a year less in service and also be a Reagan-appointee.

        Liked by 1 person

  47. keystone's avatar

    Harris is transferring money to downballot races.

    • $10M to DCCC (congressional races)
    • $10M to DSCC (senate races)
    • $2.5M to DLCC (state legislature races)
    • $1M to DAGA (state Attorney General races)

    Great to see the state AGs getting some help. I’m guessing Jeff Jackson in NC and Eugene DePasquale in PA will prob be the main beneficiaries of that chunk of money.

    Also happy to see them starting to focus on securing the Senate as well.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Also I woke up this morning, turned on MSNBC & saw a campaign bus tour on the tv. That wasn’t surprising. The surprising part was when I looked up to the top of the tv & saw the location was Boyton Beach, FL. I was pleasantly surprised.

      Senator Klobuchar was headlining the event. She had an interview & said Florida shouldn’t be ruled out. It’s the state that had the largest number of new volunteers since Harris became the nominee, it wasn’t too long ago that the state had a Democrat US Senator, President Obama won the state & they have a great US senate candidate running to flip the senate seat. It was music to my ears. Sounds like she was reading my words right here from this blog… Lol

      Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        What’s unrealistic? Harris is behind 3% in some polls. And she hasn’t stepped foot in the state, let alone her VP, Biden or any advertising money. Nobody is saying Harris is the favorite or will win. But to write off a state that was the most of the battleground states just a decade & a half ago when Harris is within the margin of error in an election that has a super important US senate race on the ballot as well, doesn’t make much sense to me.

        Liked by 1 person

  49. Aiden's avatar

    https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111104340.pdf

    Judge Federico joined the Trump/Bush Dissent from a denial for en banc rehearing.
    Where he said environmental groups did not have standing to sue/intervene.
    (Rossman voted to deny rehearing along with the rest of the liberals)

    This joins a number of conservative positions that Federico has staked including Abortion funding.

    This does not extend to criminal cases where he has dissented from conservative positions multiple times.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      His SJCQ states he was first contacted by the Kansas senators. I guess they did a good job finding somebody that was attractive enough to the administration that they knew wouldn’t turn him down while simultaneously getting a judge that will break with the liberals from time to time.

      What upsets me most of all is the administration didn’t demand getting a district court nominee at the same time. They should have said Frederico & a Democrat district court nominee or they will go with their own pick. Jabarri Wamble is looking like a better pick with each passing month now sadly.

      Like

  50. tsb1991's avatar

    We’re almost at the end of the August break tunnel, as a hearing for next week should be posted on the SJC website sometime today.

    Also, now that we’re in September, aside from any judges confirmed this month, Coggins will be able to take the bench on 9/17.

    Also reading that Mike Johnson might try to attach some poison pill to the government funding, not sure if your party shutting down the government a month out before the election is a good strategy (or if they’d even have the votes for it), but sure.

    On Monday, Helmy should be sworn in and ideally cloture motions are sent out for Wednesday/Thursday votes (Abelson’s cloture vote is set for Monday).

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a comment