Elizabeth Coombe – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York

The scion of a politically active (and Republican leaning) family in Northern New York, Elizabeth Coombe is looking to beat the clock in the Biden Presidency and join the federal bench.

Background

Born in 1967 in Ridgewood, New Jersey, the daughter of Richard Coombe, who would go on to serve a decade in the New York Assembly, and as Chairman of the Sullivan County Republican Party. Coombe received an A.B. from Hamilton College in 1989 and a J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School in 1992. Coombe then clerked for Judge Diana Murphy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

After her clerkship, Coombe served as Staff Attorney for the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission and then in the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. In 1998, Coombe joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. In 2003, she shifted to the Albany Office of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York. Since 2018, Coombe has served as First Assistant U.S. Attorney.

History of the Seat

Coombe has been nominated to a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. This seat was vacated on September 1, 2024, when Judge Glenn Suddaby took senior status.

Legal Experience

Coombe started her legal career at the Securities and Exchange Commission, where she worked on an investigation of the National Association of Securities Dealers Inc. She then shifted to the Civil Division at the Department of Justice, where, among other matters, Coombe worked on employee retirement suits brought before the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Federal Circuit. See Dilworth v. Office of Personnel Management, 132 F.3d 713 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Between 1998 and 2003, Coombe worked as a criminal AUSA in the District of Columbia. In this role, Coombe also argued appeals before the D.C. Court of Appeals (not to be confused with the D.C. Circuit). See, e.g., Mercer v. United States, 724 A.2d 1176 (D.C. 1999). Coombe also defended against 2255 motions, or motions to amend, vacate, or set aside sentences in federal court. See, e.g., Culter v. United States, 241 F. Supp. 2d 19 (D.D.C. 2003). In a notable case, she defended convictions against Rico McLaughlin for the shooting of a government informant. See United States v. McLaughlin, 164 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1998).

Since 2003, Coombe has worked as a federal prosecutor in the Northern District of New York. Notably, while with the office, Coombe prosecuted New York Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno for corruption charges. See United States v. Bruno, 661 F.3d 733 (2d Cir. 2011). Bruno was initially convicted but the convictions were vacated after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Skilling limited the reach of the honest services fraud statute. Bruno was acquitted in a retrial.

Coombe also prosecuted Giridhar Sekhar for seeking to blackmail the New York State Comptroller into approving an investment into his company. See United States v. Sekhar, 683 F.3d 436 (2d Cir. 2012). After Sekhar was convicted at trial and the Second Circuit affirmed, the Supreme Court reversed, finding that one could not extort someone for a recommendation as it was not a piece of property under the Hobbes Act. See Sekhar v. United States, 570 U.S. 529 (2013).

Political Activity

Despite coming from a politically active family, Coombe’s own political activity is fairly limited. Other than volunteering on her father’s campaigns, Coombe’s sole contribution was to Rep. John Katko (R-NY) in 2014.

Overall Assessment

While Coombe was nominated relatively late in the Senate calendar, her hearing was relatively calm compared to her fellow nominee to the Northern District. Given Coombe’s Republican ties, it’s possible that she may be seen as a consensus candidate to reach the bench, compared to other nominees pending.

47 Comments

  1. Ethan's avatar

    It’s about time we got a new post. I still can’t believe this is the best we got for Syracuse. There’ve go to at least be some bland AUSAs (e.g. Rajit Dosanjh) who are not particularly progressive but at least not Republican.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Happy new write up day everyone. We finally end the longest stretch of no new write up since I joined the blog years ago. It was 42 days ago since the last write up so I’m happy to see a new article.

      Elizabeth Coombe is a blah nominee for a blue state but she is replacing a GW Bush judge & with the election so close, I honestly just want to see the seat filled with a Democrat at this point.

      Now that we got a new write up this week, I truly hope we get the final batch of new nominees this week as well. I know we could officially get the last batch next week & still have the nominees confirmed before the end of the year but that would leave no room for error or attendance issues so this week would be best.

      Like

  5. Jamie's avatar

    I have no idea what Coombe’s political affiliation is. Her donation to Katko was more likely to a fellow AUSA she served with rather than he was a Republican.

    Gillibrand’s father was actively in the GOP, and she didn’t start voting for Democrats until Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign. So it’s not surprising that Gillibrand would find sympathy with someone like Coombe.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Zack's avatar

    Yea..I had heard through the grapevine this was a strong possibility not just because of Coombe’s political ties but also because she broke barriers as the first female chief of the criminal division of the NDNY.
    That is like catnip to Gillibrand.
    From what I’ve heard of her, she’s not a Federalist Society type but more of the run of the mill prosecutor type judge we’re used to seeing from earlier Democratic presidents.
    Not what we wanted of course but there could be far worse picks..which is about the only thing I’ll say on this.
    Also, unlike Judge Hurd, Glenn Suddaby’s senior status date was set in stone and wasn’t going to change if the nominee wasn’t from the Syracuse area.
    When all is said and done here, I expect Coombe’s duty station to be Albany.
    I also expect Brindisi to be confirmed by the skin of his teeth, as he is close to Schumer and I see him getting confirmed because of that, even at the expense of others.
    Have to wait and see.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Great news. I was critical of the Massachusetts picks for a long time. Thankfully the last two district court & Rikleman on the 1st were outstanding picks & reversed that trend. The outcome of the election in 28 days will go a long way to decide if that tend had a chance to continue.

      Like

    • tsb1991's avatar

      I’d assume that’s when his stint as chief judge is up? I figured both Clinton appointees on the DMA would go senior before either Bush appointee, Saris is going senior but Stearns, who is I think 80 years old now, is still hanging around.

      Biggest risk to this vacancy though is that there’s no guarantee it gets filled if Harris has a Republican Senate, and the seat would DEFINITELY not get filled under Trump (Trump never got an appointment to this court, I wonder how much of it is that Massachusetts is one of the biggest resist-lib states in the country and Markey and Warren would have absolutely no reason to work with Trump here, who is probably more unpopular here than the Yankees and Lakers combined).

      I live in MA so it’d be pretty cool to have an all-Dem district court to go along with an all-Dem First Circuit (although you’d also need Gorton, the 86 y/o Bush Sr. appointee to head for the exits too).

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ryan J's avatar

        That is, assuming that blue slips are still a thing under a second Trump administration. Though the nominees are young and liberal enough that a second Trump administration would likely only get 1-2 vacancies (Saylor and maybe Gorton). A Harris administration would probably have no more than 3.

        Side note: I think it’s funny that the judges still write to the outgoing president despite not retiring until after his term is up. Saylor is writing the letter to President Biden though knowing that the next president will pick his successor. In a way, it almost seems like those judges with 2025 senior status dates are teasing Biden.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        And that’s a BIG assumption. One I’m not as confident about as others on this blog. I actually hope Republicans do ditch blue slips. They can finally pull the last lever of power when it comes to the judiciary & maybe once & for all show Democrats they can’t be trusted with their word when it comes to judges. It will suck for another decade or so but I don’t know how many times they can break norms & traditions before people believe who they are when they tell you.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. Joe's avatar

    I would expect new nominees next Wednesday (October 16).

    The senate isn’t back until the week of November 12, and this would set up a hearing for that Wednesday morning. Nominees would likely get voted out of SJC on or around Dec 5.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jamie's avatar

      If the Senate doesn’t come back before the election, they will come back pretty much right after the election to pass disaster funding. It depends what Johnson does in the House. Right now he’d planning on bringing the House back immediately after E-day. I’d assume that the Senate follows suit.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        The US senate, Chuck Schumer’s US senate, THIS US senate ain’t coming back before the election. They are not going to cut this nor any other recess short. We need to stop setting unrealistic expectations. These guys don’t want to work. That’s horrible. It’s just that the other side will do terrible things if they were in power so it’s the better of the two options.

        Like

      • Jamie's avatar

        I don’t agree with you. Disaster funding is a pretty big emergency. The response to this could also decide two swing states. If Biden can get Johnson to show up pre-election, then Schumer will call the Senate back too.
        And if they can wait until after the election, the Senate will come in early if the House comes in early. They may do nothing other than pass a unanimous consent bill to extend disaster funding, but they’ll do at least that.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        I will eat my sneaker if the full senate comes back before the election. And I am in the gym right now yet have zero issue saying that as I sweat through my socks… Lol

        The senate ain’t coming beck before Election Day plain & simple. That’s a less than 1% chance. I’d give it a slightly higher chance they come back before the scheduled week after on the Wednesday – Friday after the evening. Maybe 3% chance of that happening.

        Like

  12. tsb1991's avatar

    Shanlyn Park in Hawaii is eligible to take the bench as of today. Still no new commissions issued between the other confirmed judges (Conway, Vargas, Court, and Jenkins on the Tax Court) since the Senate adjourned for the campaign.

    Was also realizing if we do get a 3rd Circuit nominee next week, it’d be kinda fitting that a judge for the Delaware seat on the 3rd Circuit would be Biden’s last appeals court nominee and depending on the order the other judges are confirmed during the lame duck, could be his final confirmed Appeals Court judge.

    Also I realized that Kent Jordan, the 3rd Circuit Judge going senior, was confirmed during the 2006 lame duck after Republicans had lost control of the Senate, and was Bush’s final appeals court judge confirmed under a Republican Senate, in the event Republicans go nuts over appeals court judges being confirmed in a lame duck if Democrats lose the Senate (technically in 2020 Republicans hadn’t lost Senate control yet as the two Georgia runoffs in January were pending).

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Leslie Kobayashi was smart to announce early. Even though Shanlyn Park was relatively uncontroversial, it was good to have her confirmation lined up so that she can get a commission now. Unlike judges who waited years to be confirmed, Park knows exactly when she will be able to take office and so can plan accordingly.

      Barring anything unexpected, the District of Hawaii will remain the same until at least 2031, when Obama appointee Derrick Watson qualifies for senior status. The district court’s one Trump appointee is pretty moderate, so no Federalist Society takeover of Hawaii anytime soon.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. dawsont825's avatar

    While I wait out this hurricane and the upcoming elections, given the heightened importance of the judiciary politically, what are some tangible examples of change that a Pres. Harris can have on the district courts around the country? But also, the circuit courts. (Just assume that Tester performs a miracle ala 2020 Susan Collins and defies the polls. Giving her a 50-50 majority with VP Walz being the tie-breaking vote)

    My first thought is that she will immediately pivot to nominating and confirming whatever remaining blue state vacancies (or new vacancies, it happens a lot after the election and inauguration) are left. Even the more controversial nominees that did not get confirmed by Biden and the Dems.

    Next, I think she’ll strike while the iron is hot and try to negotiate package deals in red states like: Louisiana, Alaska, and Missouri. I know damn well that anybody to the left of Atilla the Hun is a no go for Hawley, but I’d like to think that 8 years of no new federal judges in a state is a line we’re not willing to cross as a country. There MUST be some moderate and boring AUSA or some state judge that isn’t FedSoc aligned that can win the support of both Hawley and Schmitt. Even if they get to pick an outright republican or FedSoc-adjacent in exchange for not blocking 3-4 outright left-of-center judges, I’ll take that. Alaska should be easier because they have a vacancy crisis there and need new judges. Murkowski will be easier to work with, but I don’t rule out Sullivan dragging his feet and delaying it as long as he possibly can. With Louisiana, Kennedy is a hack and a bigot at times, but he and Cassidy are willing to work with Dem presidents. Not sure if they’ll return blue slips on ALL vacancies, but getting 5 district court judges in Louisiana will go a long way to making the courts there more equitable (even though the 5th circuit will just overturn them at every point)

    I’m sure a Pres. Harris will get other chances in red states like Texas, Florida, and Arkansas, but the bulk of her district court nominees will come from blue states and purple states.

    For the circuit courts, I think she’ll have an impact with Dem unity in the senate. Starting off with the remaining eligible judges on the 9th circuit (yes, I’m looking at you Rawlinson, Gould, and Wardlaw) and whatever other liberal circuit court judges around the country. I’m really hoping Pres. Harris gets to change the makeup of the 5th and 8th circuits. There are a lot of older conservatives on those courts and now that blue slips aren’t a thing, there’s no need to waste time negotiating with hack senators. Do to the 5th and 8th what was done to the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 9th circuits. Just nominate liberals and tell GOP senators to kick rocks.

    If a Pres. Harris can get 175 judges confirmed in her 4 years, I think that will go a long way to balancing the judiciary and blunting FedSoc’s momentum (temporarily). Not to mention the possibility of flipping either Alito or Thomas’ seat. I’ve never done a backflip before, but I might have to learn how to do them if the court goes from 6-3 to 5-4. Yes, (MAGA hack) CJ Roberts would become the swing vote again, but the pure right-wing garbage wouldn’t become binding SC precedent going forward. Associate Justice Alison Nathan has a nice ring to it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I think if Dems can salvage a 50/50 senate (Tester or losses by Cruz or Scott), you will see most of what you wrote. I was pretty blunt when I said some states won’t get ANY district court judges by the end of this year. Those states were Alabama, Missouri & Arkansas. I was 3-0.

      I can see some package deals being worked out in Missouri only because of the number of vacancies. I am still not sold on Alabama & Arkansas even through 2028 but I do tend to think two terms might be a bit too much to let vacancies go without a new judge even for the worst of senators.

      I definitely think we will see a number of vacancies from Democrat appointed circuit court judges over a first Harris term. I think she would get numerous vacancies on the Federal & 8th circuit courts as well.

      Liked by 1 person

      • dawsont825's avatar

        I’m under no allusion that the 8th circuit will go from 10-1 to 6-5 after 4 years of a Harris presidency… But 7-4 would go a long way and would even produce an occasional majority Dem 3-judge panel (kinda like what happens on occasion on the 9th circuit with the Trump appointees). Conversely, the 5th going from 10-5 to realistically 9-4 or long-shot 8-5 would go a long way.

        Not to mention continuing the progress on the 6th and 7th circuits that Biden started. A 9-7 split on the 6th is night and day better than before Biden was inaugurated. And to bring the 7th to a 6-5 split is impressive. There’s a good chance Pres. Harris can replace Easterbrook on the 7th and hopefully King on the 4th. Overall, if she can get 38+ appeals court judges, she’ll do a great job of neutralizing Trump’s hack judges.

        I didn’t even know how many vacancies were in Texas (7), Missouri (4) and Florida (4 if you count the seat that DSW was nominated to). If Harris can fill just these vacancies and a few other gettable red state district court seats like in Louisiana, Alaska, North Carolina, Ohio, and whatever random red state senate duo decides to be reasonable (Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Utah for Biden) then that chunk of 30ish red state judges (along with her inevitable blue state layups) would add to her judicial appointment number. 235 from Biden and 190ish for Harris would be very positive for the country.

        Liked by 2 people

    • star0garnet's avatar

      What I’m somewhat worried about is the possibility that a President Harris would have to deal with a higher proportion of red state circuit vacancies than Biden. Most of why Biden’s red state district appointees have slowed dramatically is the proximity to the presidential election, but part is also GOP senators’ angst at Biden’s red state circuit picks. Biden’s first 21 circuit appointees didn’t have a GOP senator with a blue slip; 12 of his subsequent 22 have, as do 4 of the 6 announced vacancies. While the currently senior-eligible circuit judges lean blue, those that qualify in the next presidential term are heavily red state. Breaking them down into four groups by blue slips and appointing party, with the year they qualify:

      Dem, no GOP blue slip:
      Dyk (Fed), 2010
      Clay (6th, MI), 2013
      Gould (9th, WA), 2013
      Rawlinson (9th, NV), 2017
      Gregory (4th, VA), 2018
      Wardlaw (9th, CA), 2019
      Reyna (Fed), 2022
      Taranto (Fed), 2025
      Murguia (9th, AZ), 2025
      Restrepo (3rd, PA), 2026
      Schwartz (3rd, NJ), 2027
      Pillard (DC), 2027
      Harris (4th, MD), 2028
      Wilkins (DC), 2028
      Millett (DC), 2028

      Dem, GOP blue slip:
      King (4th, WV), 2009
      Moore (6th, OH), 2013
      Stewart (5th, LA), 2015
      Matheson (10th, UT), 2022
      Graves (5th, MS), 2022
      Diaz (4th, NC), 2025
      McHugh (10th, UT), 2026
      Bacharach (10th, OK), 2026
      Higginson (5th, LA), 2026
      Jordan (11th, FL), 2026
      Christen (9th, AK), 2027
      Phillips (10th, WY), 2027
      Moritz (10th, KS), 2027

      GOP, no GOP blue slip:
      Newman (Fed), 1996
      Lourie (Fed), 2003
      Loken (8th, MN), 2005
      Niemeyer (4th, MD), 2006
      Henderson (DC), 2009
      Wilkinson (4th, VA), 2009
      Easterbrook (7th, IL), 2013
      Hartz (10th, NM), 2014
      Smith (9th, CA), 2016
      Prost (Fed), 2016
      Callahan (9th, CA), 2017
      Griffin (6th, MI), 2019
      Ikuta (9th, CA), 2020
      Agee (4th, VA), 2020
      Tymkovich (10th, CO), 2021
      Livingston (2nd, NY), 2024
      Chagares (3rd, NJ), 2027
      Bennett (9th, HI), 2028

      GOP, GOP blue slip:
      Smith (5th, TX), 2011
      Jones (5th, TX), 2014
      Benton (8th, MO), 2017
      Southwick (5th, MS), 2019
      Shepherd (8th, AR), 2019
      Richman (5th, TX), 2020
      Sykes (7th, WI), 2022
      Smith (8th, AR), 2023
      Erickson (8th, ND), 2024
      Engelhardt (5th, LA), 2025
      Sutton (6th, OH), 2025
      Holmes (10th, OK), 2026
      Pryor (11th, AL), 2027
      Colloton (8th, IA), 2028
      Gruender (8th, MO), 2028
      Haynes (5th, TX), 2028

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        I tend to think a red state circuit court vacancy could help things out for district court vacancies (If Harris plays it smart). I think we have examples on both sides during Biden’s term

        Texas is an example of what NOT to do. There were EIGHT vacancies on the district courts of Texas. We only got nominees for three of them. One was a good pick, one was an older decent pick & the third I am not sure if he is just an Independent or a moderate Republican. In return, we got a 59-year-old left of center moderate for the 5th. This deal was inexcusable. We should have either gotten at least six of the eight district court seats filled with no Republicans or gone with any number of younger & more liberal Latinas from Texas.

        On the flip side I think Indiana is a good model. Doris Pryor wasn’t my first choice, but she is a Black woman in her mid 40’s that was a former public defender. In exchange we got three of the four district court vacancies filled. One with an outstanding Democrat in her early 40’s, a reasonable Republican & a moderate to left leaning third judge.

        If we can get some vaccines on the 8th as I expect will happen, that can be used to leverage movement on the district court vacancies in states like Missouri & Arkansas. The White House should lead with a young, hard left liberal & work their way to the left of center to fill the district court seats.

        Liked by 3 people

      • star0garnet's avatar

        I think that largely comes down to the individual senators. E.g. you may get Kennedy to sign off on a better slate of district court nominees if your initial circuit court suggestion is somebody he’d realistically sign off on. (I’m assuming Harris would generally continue the Biden approach of trying to get GOP blue slips for circuit nominees.)

        To that end though, here are the currently known and potential vacancies in the various state with potential GOP-slipped circuit vacancies:
        AL: 2 announced, 2 potential
        AK: 2 ann., 1 pot.
        AR (2): 1 ann., 2 pot.
        FL: 4 ann., 13 pot.
        IA: none
        KS: 2 ann., 1 pot.
        LA (3): 4 ann., 10 pot.
        MS (2): 1 ann., 3 pot.
        MO (2): 4 ann., 3 pot.
        NC: 4 ann., 7 pot.
        ND: none
        OH (2): 2 ann., 6 pot.
        OK (2): 3 pot.
        TX (4): 7 ann., 15 pot.
        UT (2): 1 pot.
        WV: 4 pot.
        WI: 4 pot.
        WY: 1 pot.

        Liked by 2 people

      • dawsont825's avatar

        That’s a great observation! And thank you for breaking it down like that.

        I mentioned it earlier, but the 10th circuit is still liberal leaning because Obama was able to work with GOP senators in conservative states such as Oklahoma, Utah, Kansas, and Wyoming to appoint moderate to left leaning judges to the 10th circuit. All of those judges are at least 10 years into their tenure and due to them being mostly from non-diverse legal backgrounds, they could be looking to get paid before they’re very old. Harris is going to have to find a way to either negotiate with those senators in a timely manner, or just bypass them altogether; WITHOUT spending 6 months negotiating and then naming an older moderate to replace an already older moderate.

        I’m confident that she’ll be able to replace 70% from the “Dem/no GOP blue slip required” list. Those are the low hanging fruit. Dem appointees want to see their judicial legacy maintained and it may very well align with their wish to not hear as many cases or seek other employment opportunities. The Dem appointees in purple (Ohio, Wisconsin) and in red states will be tough because that’s where an outright majority on any appeals court is won or lost. I don’t think the GOP with an already heightened awareness of the lower courts will reward GOP senators for working in good faith to keep liberal judges in their states deciding major cases. There is no incentive to allow a Dem president to appoint judges in their state, it’s gonna have to be a priority for Harris as it is to Biden.

        The GOP appointees in blue states with no blue slips required will also be an interesting development to watch. Any death or senior status announcements from any of those judges will be an automatic pickup for Harris and Dems. They won’t need negotiation from GOP senators, and they can nominate as liberal a candidate as they want. Any further GOP flips from the 4th circuit will put that circuit firmly in the Dems hand. Which only illustrates how to handle a rough circuit court (it does help to have Dem senators in the circuit to make the confirmation process easier, but still). The 5th and 8th circuits don’t have to be boogeymen for long, the path is there to bring those circuits to heel. The question becomes, will Harris and the Dems take full advantage??

        Finally, I have very little hope that Harris will get to replace many GOP appointees in GOP states. If she gets to replace ANY, then it will be a great day. I don’t see any of the less hacky (but still hacks) judges from the 5th voluntarily stepping down. At most, they’ll die and have no say in who replaces them, or they’ll condition their senior status announcement to see who will be nominated to replace them. I wouldn’t be over-the-moon excited to see more Irma Ramirez’s on the 5th circuit, but anything that leads to a less extreme 5th circuit would start the process of balancing that court.

        All in all, if Harris can replace 85% of the Dem appointees/no blue slip required, 50% of the Dem appointees/GOP blue slip required, 40% of the GOP appointees/ no blue slips required, and 20% of the GOP appointees/GOP blue slips required…. along with 125+ district court appointees. That would be a successful 4 year tenure for the first woman president of the U.S.

        God, please let Harris replace one (or both) of Alito and/or Thomas. I’ll never ask for anything again, I promise.

        Liked by 2 people

      • star0garnet's avatar

        One thing I have an eye on is when a judge will decide to test the boundaries of taking senior status upon confirmation of a successor. Hurd has done that for (purportedly) parochial reasons, and Karen Caldwell almost did it for political reasons (but with her senators’ ideologies to shield her). But say that Niemeyer got really sick, but would only go senior if he got a Ramirez (or even Brooks Smith)-style replacement. Would the WH and MD senators take replacing an archconservative with a moderate, or would they gamble on getting a vacancy that they fully controlled? I suppose we could also see it tested if we end up in a timeline with Trump 2.0 and Stranch, Wynn, or Wilson don’t end up getting replaced by this senate.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        I think there are a lot of variables that would come into play with your scenario. The composition of the senate, how “sick” the judge really is (Old age, Cancer or just waiting for a big pay day at a law firm for example), how early in a Harris term the vacancy was announced, are there any district court vacancies in the state, etc…

        I think we have various examples during Biden’s term & I think we would see a similar approach by Harris (Hopefully with the exception of Ramirez). Florida had a last year vacancy on the 11th with multiple district court vacancies in the district courts. Biden bypassed the senators (The SJC makes no mention of Kidd even meeting with Rubio or Scott) & picked a Black man in his early 40’s. The Kansas vacancy on the 10th happened much earlier in Biden’s term & we saw how much time that took (Both pre & post Wamble). There was only the one vacancy in the district court so I would assume Harris would not let Republicans jerk her around as long as Biden allowed but would at least give the appearance of working in good faith for an early term red state vacancy.

        Liked by 2 people

  14. star0garnet's avatar

    Harris’s potential impact by court in the a) parallel universe scenario where she gets to replace all senior-eligible judges and b) where she replaces all senior-eligible Dem appointees (plus the impact if the known vacancies, except Maine, don’t get filled by Biden):

    SCOTUS: 5 (56%); 2 (22%)

    10th: 8, 67%; 5, 42%
    8th: 7, 64%; 0
    5th: 9, 53%; 3, 18%
    Fed: 6, 50%; 3, 25%
    4th: 7, 47%; 4, 27% (+1, 7%)
    DC: 4, 36%; 3, 27%
    9th: 9, 31%; 5, 17%
    6th: 4, 25%; 2, 13% (+1, 6%)
    3rd: 3, 21%; 2, 14% (+2, 14%)
    7th: 2, 18%; 0
    11th: 2, 17%; 1, 8% (+1, 8%)
    2nd: 1, 8%; 0
    1st: 0; 0

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to Ethan Cancel reply