Sharad Desai – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

The brother of Ninth Circuit Judge Roopali Desai, Phoenix based attorney Sharad Desai is vying to become the first Indian American judge on the federal district court bench in Arizona.

Background

Born to an Indian immigrant family in Phoenix, Desai received a joint B.S. and B.A. from the University of Arizona in 2003 and then a J.D. from New York University School of Law in 2006. Desai then returned to Arizona to clerk for Arizona Supreme Court Justice Rebecca White Berch.

After his clerkship, Desai joined Osborn Maledon, P.A. in Phoenix. He became a Member with the firm in 2012. In 2015, he shifted to Honeywell International Inc., a business conglomerate working in aerospace and technology, among other areas, where he serves as Vice President and General Counsel.

History of the Seat

Desai has been nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, to a seat to be vacated on October 21, 2024, when Judge G. Murray Snow takes senior status.

Legal Experience

After his clerkship, Desai worked in litigation at Osborn Maledon, P.A. While at the firm, Desai represented a class of retired Arizona judges in a class action suit against a change in the calculations of pension benefit increases for judges. See Fields v. Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan, 320 P.3d 1160 (Ariz. 2014). Desai secured a victory for the class in trial court, which was affirmed by the Arizona Supreme Court. See id.

While at the firm, Desai was appointed by the Arizona District Court to represent a class of pretrial detainees in litigation by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office seeking to terminate consent agreements overseeing conditions in their jails. See Graves v. Arpaio, 48 F. Supp. 3d 1318 (D. Ariz. 2014). Desai maintained his representation of the class until he left the firm in 2015.

On the pro bono side, Desai represented a Nevada prisoner seeking recovery for costs from litigation challenging a disciplinary hearing against him. As part of his representation, Desai briefed and argued the appeal before the Ninth Circuit. See Jones v. McDaniel, 607 F. App’x 710 (9th Cir. 2015).

For the last nine years at Honeywell International Inc., Desai has served as a Counsel, advising various divisions of the company, and overseeing litigation in general. However, he has not appeared in court during this time. Nonetheless, Desai has supervised litigation, including in a $38 million product liability suit involving a Honeywell autopilot on an aircraft, which ended in a jury verdict in Honeywell’s favor after a two week trial. See Egbers v. Honeywell, Int’l, Cook County Circuit Ct. Case No. 06 L 6992 (Ill. 2016).

Overall Assessment

Perhaps more than any other Senator, Senator Kirsten Synema has been able to grease the wheels for nominees from her state. The three nominees to Arizona courts from the Biden Administration have each drawn more than 60 senators in support, a remarkable feat, given that only around 20% of the Administration’s judicial nominees have drawn that level of support.

While Desai is unlikely to get the same level of support, given the fact that his nomination will almost certainly be considered in the lame duck session, it is possible that Sinema will be able to work her magic a fourth time and ensure that Desai joins the bench in due course.

1,386 Comments

  1. Mike's avatar

    Actually, Thom Tillis might be the biggest winner.

    He convinced Dems to let him keep 1 circuit court + 4 district seats (2 Bush / 2 Obama).

    Trump only filled 2/14 of North Carolina’s districts in his first term, now he’ll get at minimum 6/14.

    Joe Biden confirmed more judges to South Carolina (1) than North (0), wow!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. shawnee68's avatar

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/senate-democrats-livid-exiting-sinema-110000922.html

    You guys still haven’t got over the Ramirez nomination?lol

    It wasn’t a “give away” the lady earned it. The 40 something guy she replaced didn’t want to stay on the bench for 30 years.

    The votes were not there for the remaining circuit judges so get over it. To lie or misrepresent what transpired there will not change anything.

    Manchin and Sinema endeavored to tank nominations without the Dems knowledge.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I think what people like Gavi, myself & others are talking about is a totally different thing than what you are. Irma Ramirez & just about every federal judicial nominee (Democrat or Republican) has “Earned it”. I have never stepped foot inside of a law school. Most of these nominees have dedicated more than half of the lives to the law. This isn’t a discussion about is she qualified for the job. I don’t think anybody in their right mind would question that.

      This is a question of who the best nominees are to fill these vacancies based on what you personally want. Now I can’t speak for you, but when it comes to me, I want young & proven progressives for every circuit court & blue state district court vacancy. Irma Ramirez is neither of the two.

      Now of course there are exceptions to every rule. For the young part, both Beth Robinson & Nicole Berner were on the older side, but I still gave them an A & A+ respectively. Doris Pryor wasn’t the most progressive choice from Indiana, but I still gave her an A- because she was young, decently progressive & we filled most of the Indiana district court vacancies along with her.

      Texas had 8 district court vacancies. We only filled 3 of them. If we were going to get a 59-year-old left off center circuit court judge, I would have demanded filling at least 6 of those 8 with all Democrats (left of center, older or what have you). Instead, we are handing Trump red state district court vacancies to fill right out the gate.

      So yes, I would say the Ramirez nomination was the worst one under Biden with Childs & Pan (DC Circuit) not too far behind. Only Chad Meredith would have been worse had that one been announced a day earlier before Dobbs.

      Like

    • Ryan J's avatar

      I’m not actually mad at the Ramirez nomination but I’m very mad about Cruz holding 7 of 10 district court seats open. Cruz and Cornyn also held 2 of 3 5th circuit vacancies open during Obama’s presidency, meaning that the Texas delegation to the 5th circuit has a 8-1 Republican majority.

      As with the 5th circuit, it will be very difficult to get those Texas district court seats back even if Dems regain power w/o blue slips in the future.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Exactly. It’s not the Ramirez nomination alone that has me upset. It’s Republicans bringing a gun to a gun fight while Democrats being a butter knife.

        Had Obama filled the two vacant 5th (TX) seats & even going back to both of Bill Clinton’s Latino’s for the 5th (TX) being blocked, then Ramirez wouldn’t be so bad. But since we don’t live in a vacuum, we have to fake everything that has happened into account. Therefore Biden should have told Cornyn & Cruz give us 6 Democrats for the 8 vacancies & we will go with Ramirez. Otherwise we will go with Rochelle Garza or Lee Merritt.

        Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        There’s not much you can do about Texas if Cornyn and Cruz are re-elected. The 5th circuit is gonna be far right for quite some time.

        It used to be that the 4th Circuit was packed with right wing nuts in part because the Sen Jesse Helms blocked Democratic nominees

        When Obama was elected he stacked it with decent judges.

        I am glad we still have blue slips. We would be up a creek if that practice ended.

        Liked by 1 person

      • lilee2122's avatar

        When I think of the 5th circuit courts in Texas, I think uninformed and unqualified and rights judges, flimsy reasoning and the outlier among the US Appeals courts circuits.. Even Scotus turns down part or all of most their cases or just doesn’t want to hear them at times… I’m thankful there are now over 230 biden judges to neutralize most of the 5th circuit idiocy…That Ken Paxton is corrupt and has an oversize ego and is now trying to sue a ny dr for sending medication to a lady in texas.. when will Texas women and the men who cherish them stand up for their loved ones rights.. looks like not yet

        Liked by 2 people

  5. Mitch's avatar

    More news about the pardons by Joe Biden. Biden actually commuted the sentence of one of the Kids for Cash judges. This venal judge had sent hundreds of juveniles to a violent prison for frivolous offenses after the prison developer gave him a large kickback. WTF was Biden thinking?

    Liked by 4 people

  8. Gavi's avatar

    @Ethan, will you maintain a list of possible judges under Trump? I’ll never check it, but if you do, you may want to add Andrew N. Ferguson of the FTC for the 4th Circuit. He’s a Virginian, but I could easily see him accepting a nomination for that court from his own state or even from Maryland. If Niemeyer goes senior or dies, nothing stops Trump from shifting this seat to MD to fill it with Ferguson. This would be ironic, since the last MD seat on CA4 was held up for so long over disagreement about state ties.

    Speaking of the 4th, and sorry to bury the lead but now that Park as withdrawn his nomination, Wynn’s vacancy is no longer listed on US COURTS!!! Does that mean anything!?! Stranch’s vacancy is still listed. Or am I reading too much. Any word from Tillis today!?!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Ethan's avatar

    Hi @Gavi,

    As of late I’ve been too sad to check the blog so thanks to @Dequan for letting me know about this.

    Anyways, I’ve been keeping a shortlist of circuit court picks for a future Republican administration for a little over a year now and that contains mostly district court judges, state Supreme Court judges, state appellate court judges, former Republican appointed US Attorneys, current/ former red state Solicitors General, and former clerks to conservative SCOTUS justices (Ferguson included on the latter two, so he’s been on my radar for a while.)

    For the next 4 years, I’ll be keeping track of possibilities but only as each vacancy arises, not for every possibility no matter how unlikely like I have been doing. As for my current list, I’ll be updating it to remove people who will be over a certain age by 2029 and adding ones who will be 12 years removed from law school by then.

    For you and anyone else that plans to leave the blog after January 20th (if it even continues since @Harsh hasn’t posted in quite a while and this thread is at over 1,000 comments), my email is emenaker529@gmail.com. On LinkedIn, I’m Ethan Menaker.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Gavi's avatar

      Got there before this Doe guy. I’ve been rage checking US Courts daily in hopes of being wrong. Once I heard Park withdraw, I started checking multiple times a day. Now we have a formula, Campbell should withdraw and clear the way for Stranch, not that she needs to, but it’s much tidier.

      Do we need to form shifts to check US Courts?!

      Liked by 2 people

  14. Rick's avatar

    Hey Sen Tillis go have a TIA stroke. You would THINK he’d know by now a judge dictates the when, & why to take senior status or retire. Judge Wynn had no part of this senate deal, he expected Ryan Park to be his replacement.

    Liked by 4 people

    • lilee2122's avatar

      The North Carolina GOP is playing politics by taking actions that look to be a power grab and that weaken the Democrat governors power. Another NC sad state of its representatives is GOP Griffin asking for a 3rd recount against Alison Riggs.. Get this the 5 member board is still hearing protests by these gop reps on Wed…. The GOP of NC need to shape up and quit playing…. Thank you Judge Wynn and the one WNC judge so far who have rescinded for the good of your state..

      Liked by 2 people

  15. Mitch's avatar

    Speaking of the Fourth Circuit, I still expect Steven Agee to take Senior Status. I also expect Richard Dietz of the North Carolina Supreme Court to be the front-runner to succeed him.

    For progressives, the upside will be that Ryan Park will probably replace Dietz on the state Supreme Court if that happens.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Mitch's avatar

    I have serious egg on my face, I hope Dequan continues to be gracious.

    Maybe I’m the only one here, but I was shocked by Wynn’s decision to rescind his status. I never expected it. Wynn recently attended a retirement party held for him in Robersonville.

    Also in North Carolina, and I promise I did my research this time, Albert Diaz of the Fourth Circuit is eligible for Senior Status in December 2025.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Zack's avatar

    Imo, this isn’t just about ensuring the seat didn’t flip, Wynn was put through the ringer himself more then once by Jesse Helms and Republicans and saw Ryan Park go through the same thing.

    Not shocked he wouldn’t reward that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      Haaaaaa… Mitch being upset about somebody playing politics with the judiciary is the equivalent to that cop in the movie Casablanca being shocked that there was gambling going on in a casino as he walks out with his winnings. Stranch please rescind soon.

      As a matter of fact, while I doubt it will happen, it’s not impossible for judge Jordan to rescind as well. I know he’s a GW Bush appointee but he did get Biden’s blue slip. I hope the White House is doing some behind the scenes work to try & talk him into staying on the bench too. Long shot but after this “deal”, all bets are off.

      Like

      • Mitch's avatar

        @Dequan

        In a related matter, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals once had a reputation for bitter personal feuding among some of the judges. The late Judge Boyce Martin got into conflicts with some of the junior judges. He allegedly steered charged cases to himself or allies instead of randomly and was accused of withholding evidence from some of the other judges in appeals cases. Eventually, fellow Judge Alice Batchhelder filed an ethics complaint against him regarding his travel expense account.

        Does the court still have a reputation for conflict or is that no longer the case?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I haven’t heard of such accounts about the 6th anytime recently in the past decades. I’ve heard rumblings about the 9th but with a small number of judges, mostly VanDyke. Of course the 2nd had the rumor about judge Merriam being bad to her law clerks but I think that was before Biden elevators her.

        We have all heard about the 5th which is no surprise. Jones & Ho seem to be the most accused of having issues. Surprisingly I’ve heard the 3rd is most cordial. That all is subject to change if Trump has two vacancies to fill right out the gate.

        Like

      • Mitch's avatar

        I haven’t heard anything recent about the Sixth myself, so maybe things have calmed down there. I remember bringing it up here a couple of years ago when Andre Mathis was confirmed, wondering if he was prepared to serve if the conflicts were still going on. You were confident that Mathis would not have any problems.

        Liked by 1 person

  23. Squish's avatar

    The Sixth Circuit is far more collegial than it was when Martin was Chief. Some of the older liberals can be a little testy to work for, but I’ve heard that everyone gets along for the most important—liberals will work with conservatives and, while disagreeing on the merits at times, don’t go for each other’s throats.

    Sutton’s influence as Chief has only made the other judges work harder to keep up with his pace and work ethic. Much different environment than the fiasco with Martin.

    Like

  24. Rick's avatar

    Has there been a complaint issued yet against Marbley or Wynn?..

    So these ethic complaints can’t do anything correct, other than make noise? I guess the Republicans, as bitter and with the deep sense of entitlement they have regarding judicial nominations, they could try to impeach these judges, but they’ll never get 67 votes.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Rick's avatar

        Thanks Dequan

        Expect some fiery speeches Mon on senate floor from McConnell, Tillis, maybe Blackburn whining about judges rescinding

        I would think Schumer will file cloture Mon on the 2 remaining District Court judges.

        Well, guess this is it. Last week with Senate Democrats controlling the chamber.. Was a nice 4 year run, and would have even been better if not for Manchin and Sinema..

        Look back on the 2020 senate races where Sara Gideon (ME), Cal Cunningham (NC) or 2022 when Barnes (WI) lost. If we would have won these races, what a difference. Would have had more judges, voting rights bill, perhaps DC statehood..

        Liked by 2 people

    • Joe's avatar

      I agree, Rick. Mangi is in his late 40s and unlikely to ever be nominated again anyway. He may as well put it all out there and call a spade a spade.

      The opposition from the Nevada senators is particularly frustrating, because we know it will just mean a right wing fraud filling that seat instead. I hope when that eventually happens next year, Rosen and CCM get a fair amount of heat for denying Mangi the seat instead.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Gavi's avatar

        I can’t wait to hear those 2 you mentioned unironically coming out against the hack that Trump will nominate for that seat, clutching their pearls, saying how terrible the Trump pick is. Their NO vote against that hack should be a walk of shame for the 2 of them. They’d be doing something on that new nominee that Mangi’s never got: a vote.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      I tried to post this earlier, but I guess I got Word Pressed…

      What happened to Mangi is disgusting. I particularly blame the Nevada senators but again I place most of the blame at the foot of Schumer’s feet. He should have sent a cloture motion for Mangi (And EVERY circuit court nominee) the following week after voted to the floor from the SJC. The only exception should be attendance issues. All other work should be brought to a haul when a circuit court nominee is pending.

      As for who Trump could nominate to the SCOTUS with the next vacancy, I will stand by my James Ho prediction. He is the number one see in my book.

      Liked by 1 person

  27. Zack's avatar

    Mangi’s not wrong and it sickens me how he was treated but it was clear he didn’t have the votes and at some point, the bullet should have been bitten and someone else nominated to ensure the seat didn’t flip, which now it will.
    One person doesn’t matter more then the greater good.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. tsb1991's avatar

    We got cloture on the final two district nominees. Tomorrow will probably be the NDAA (they’re concurring in a House amendment so I think it goes to the President’s desk afterwards), and I’m sure the government funding will be the last thing this Congress handles. Unless they plan on staying around beyond Thursday or Friday there’s probably no room for at least the local DC judges, since I highly doubt they will be given any kind of expedition.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Zack's avatar

    Wanted to add another tidbit about the 6th Circuit.
    After George W added numerous judges to it (something he was able to do in part because Orrin Hatch kept several seats open after Republicans took control of the Senate) tensions rose in part because the W judges along with the conservative Reagan/George Sr judges started pushing the law in a more far right direction, something many of the court’s liberals, especially Boyce Martin called out.
    It’s why many on the liberal side viewed the charges against him as politically motived, the 6th’s Circuits conservative wanted Boyce gone and in the end, he was and they got a flip of a likely SCOTUS nominee in Amul Thapar if Alito or Thomas retire.
    Also, a major source of tension was the fact that there were numerous lawsuits from OH dealing with voter id laws/gerrymandering and other election supression measures among others things that were often decided on a 8-7 vote (the conservative majority at the time).
     Alice Batchhelder was the deciding vote despite the fact her husband William Batchhelder was a key Republican legislator and Speaker of the house responsible for many of said bills, which was a clear conflict of interest, yet she never recused herself once from hearing any cases OH Republicans were involved in, something pointed out in numerous dissents.
    Funny how all the Republicans who scream about activist judges etc. from Democrats never had an issue with that.
    It’s why I hope Stranch follows Judge’s Wynn lead on her senior status, no way she should allow another hack onto that court if she can help it.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Gavi's avatar

        I would be against that ridiculous revisionism. Let me explain:

        1: Say the Senate did its job and voted and all the nominees failed. The two judges could at that time rescind and we’d still get to attempt to fill the other two seats (Lipez and Mangi), with one being highly confirmable. So at worst, that would be 12+ district court confirmations (over however long Republicans wanted to drag it out), plus 2 rescissions (assuming the votes failed) plus Lipez confirmation and possibly Mangi with the right combination of absences.

        2: I highly doubt that Karla Campbell and Julia Lipez don’t have the votes. So even with Wynn’s rescission (assuming Tillis’s Dems were still in his pocket), we could have gotten CA6 and CA1 filled with Campbell and Lipez. Mangi would have been the only loss.

        So no, let’s not already try to rewrite the history of this horrible deal before it’s been over. Wynn’s rescission and Stranch’s (if it happens) are ONLY contingencies to mitigate a bad deal, not a victory!

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        No, no, absolutely no. This deal is no less worse with Stanch & Wynn rescinding. That’s because we likely could have confirmed Lipez & Campbell had the “deal” not been made along with all of the district court nominees that got confirmed anyway. The only difference would have been the senate working past Thursday at 5pm & late nights. Hell there’s no guarantee we wouldn’t have confirmed Park and/or Mangi with Republican absences. At least some votes have been missed by McConnell because of his fall. I’m almost sure there’s no way Vance would have actually stuck around for all five weeks in session. And Lord knows who else would have missed if you even sniffed working on Thanksgiving & Christmas week. No sir, I will not rewrite history in any way, shape or form & try to call this anything less than what it is, which is an unmitigated, utter bull sh*t disaster of a “deal”.

        @Rick

        I think we will find out the answer to your thoughts sooner rather than later. Sinema could possibly have a conservative post senate job lined up. That would explain her change of heart but I wouldn’t be shocked by your suggestion if an outright bribe either.

        Like

      • Joe's avatar

        It certainly makes the deal more palatable, but still a bad deal in my opinion.

        Senate Dems should have stayed all night when the GOP was throwing a fit, shortened the time for all the procedural votes, and knocked them all out before Thanksgiving in a marathon session. It just would have required two late night. At that point there would have been only 5 nominees plus Cheeks/Murillo, so GOP leverage would be significantly lessened.

        Then, maybe you make a deal to confirm, say, 2/4 appellate seats instead of 0/4. You can maybe get an agreement to fast track local judges too.

        Senate Dems/WH could also have pushed forward with nominees for the third circuit plus Weinstein as well. Even if they were only voted out of committee on 12/19 and time ran out, maybe you can use them as negotiating chips this week to work out a favorable deal on the budget. There was really nothing to lose.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Rick's avatar

      Something changed severely w/Sinema. I mean, she voted for Sung, Abudu, Ho, Choudhury, Merle, Bloomekatz, Berner. Then in 2024, she all of a sudden finds her inner Republican and doesn’t support the remaining circuit court nominees, as well as several District Court nominees.

      I truly think it’s a combination of extreme bitterness from not being able to seek re-election, along with taking a bribe from some GOP sugar daddy to vote against nominees after the election.

      Liked by 1 person

  31. Gavi's avatar

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/fourth-circuit-judge-reverses-retirement-183544536.html

    “Xiao Wang, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law who has studied retirements in the federal judiciary, said the precedent Wynn has set could pose challenges to future deals like the one to advance several Biden district court nominees. He said it may also encourage conservative judges to take senior status decisions that appear political, particularly as Trump takes office and seeks to fill as many vacancies as possible.”

    “… the precedent Wynn has set could pose challenges to future deals like the one to advance several Biden district court nominees.”

    Perfect! Don’t threaten me with a good thing! I wish the prospect of senior status rescissions had prevented this horrible deal in the first place.

    Also, this premise buys into Republican talking point that what Wynn did was soooo unprecedented. This person can’t be such a good expert on judicial retirement if he thinks that.

    “… it may also encourage conservative judges to take senior status decisions that appear political”

    Huh, expert? Does this expert not know of Mitch McConnell’s appeal to Thomas Griffith and the others? This is just the world we now live in. This is reason #29946463 why you should be skeptical of co-called experts.

    Liked by 3 people

  32. Joe's avatar

    Yeah, Gavi, that interview is a bit too much for me. As if judges haven’t been doing this for years already and Republican senators didn’t make judicial confirmations a blatantly partisan episode two decades ago.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Zack's avatar

    @Rick, I agree.
    I think what she’s doing now is basically a FU to Schumer/Democrats on her way out the door after she was rightfully primaried.
    @Dequan, the issue would be is how many Democrats would stick around if Schumer had actually put his foot down during the year and held some votes.
    My guess is sadly not many.
    He had certain senators he really couldn’t do anything about if they decided to be pricks (Manchin came from a Trump 40+ state, you aren’t going to be able to tell him to pound sand) or during the general, just because of who made up the majority.
    I will say post election, there is no excuse for the “deal” he made or for some senators who won’t be there next month to stick around and him trying to spin giving up Circuit court seats which are far more valuable for district court seats as some kind of victory is BS.
    Park/Campbell/Lipiz IMO could have gotten through, especially with McConnell being out.
    Mangi IMO was always doomed and should have been withdrawn.
    I get not wanting to do so but in the end, fighting for him did nothing to help us with Muslim voters etc. and will allow his seat to go back to an Alito clone.

    Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        He’s there and has more knowledge about than anyone here.

        The Kidd nomination should have failed too.

        It was the perfect storm where the Sr Senator was more interested in his future employment prospects than the job he was elected to do.

        As such, Kidd was confirmed when he should been rejected.

        Of the remaining circuit court nominees I think the 11th more necessary than the rest.

        I think Kidd has scotus potential we’ll see how he does for the next four years.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        That is not correct. Just because Schumer is there doesn’t make him better at math than any of us on here. I’m sorry but there’s no way you can tell me senate Democrats have a 2-seat advantage & couldn’t confirm ANY of the four circuit court nominees with 2 additional Republicans our for at about a month.

        I know it feels good to defend Schumer. Believe me, I’m a lifelong Democrat. It doesn’t bring me any joy to criticize them. But we need to be honest with ourselves or things will not change for the better. The math just ain’t mathing.

        Like

      • shawnee68's avatar

        For whatever reason you continue to claim it’s all about math.

        That is much too simplistic and you know it. I don’t hear from anyone else in the Senate who supports what you are suggesting .

        It wasn’t known to anyone on the Dem side that the NLRB pick would go down either .

        That was done on purpose. So if you want to to cast blame it should go to Manchin and Sinema.

        You can also blame both Nevada senators who don’t have a spine.

        It’s too bad Tester is leaving at least he stood for something when others wouldn’t .

        Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        Unfortunately, your NLRB pick example is not a good analogy. Again, we had senators Vance & Rounds out for over a MONTH. They are both Republicans. That means (Stay with me now) the senate math was 51-47 instead of 51-49. That is a Manchin & Sinema proof majority. The NLRB vote was AFTER the election. Senator Vance was no longer campaigning. Senator Rounds doctor wasn’t preventing him from getting on a plane to fly to Washington DC.

        AGAIN, you keep saying it isn’t as simple as I am making it out to be. Yes, it is. It’s very simple. Nice try though. Math is math… Lol

        Like

      • shawnee68's avatar

        How do you know that Vance and Rounds would not have appeared to vote after cloture was filed?

        Just because they were not there when other business was being done doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have returned to DC.

        It’s time to move on. Trump isn’t complaining about 2020 anymore . What you are saying is kind of like that.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        How do I know Vance & Rounds wouldn’t have showed up? Uuummm, if you have eye surgery & your doctor tells you not to get on a plane or leave far from home, I guess you could defy the doctors’ orders & do it anyway but I highly doubt a man of senator Rounds age & privilege would risk that. And Vance schedule was posted well in advance. And here’s the thing. Even if we don’t know (Let’s be honest, we do know but for the sake of argument), the time to try is when it’s most likely the two would not be in attendance, not after the election when you know there is nothing stopping all 49 from showing up.

        And no, it’s not time to move on. These are coveted circuit court seats. There’s only 179 of them. Democrats just tried to hand Trump five to fill because they are lazy. I don’t know why you seem to be more Hell bent on defending people who are lazy versus being upset yourself that either people you know, if not your own life will be made worse off by Trump circuit court judges that should have been Biden judges. I am not criticizing to criticize. These are real life issues that YOU should not be happy with either.

        Like

      • Joe's avatar

        Shawnee, we do not need to invent narratives. Kidd was confirmed 49-45 with Sinema voting in favor and Fetterman absent. If the GOP had had full attendance, VP Harris could have broken a tie.

        I will say that this vote in particular seemed to have lit a fire under Senate Rs and that’s what prompted their efforts to block everything. That’s one reason I really wish Kidd, Campbell, and Lipez had been confirmed in September. None of those votes were particularly controversial and they probably all would have gotten through with Vance campaigning.

        Liked by 1 person

  34. Zack's avatar

    Yea, I just read that interview with the so called judicial “expert.
    Once again, Republicans and the hacks they put on the courts get a pass for political crap while Democratic ones don’t.
    If nothing else, what does Wang make of the fact that at the recent Federalist Society event in D.C., you had several sitting judges toasting some of the right wing SCOTUS rulings done the past couple of years.
    That makes it plain as day they are pushing Republican goals yet crickets.
    As others have said, this is just another example going all the way back to the Reagan years in where Republicans and Democrats and the judges they appoint are held to different standards.
    Same with the nuclear option.
    Obama/Harry Reid tried to do a deal like was done with W to avoid it and got told to pound sand yet Democrats still get blamed for it and have “experts” etc. who think Orrin Hatch or McConnell wouldn’t have done it if push had come to shove.
    Bottom line, Judge Wynn is under no obligation to watch a fine nominee like Ryan Park get slimed simply because he wasn’t a far right hack and let the 4th Circuit inch back to the right wing hellhole it once was.
    If some experts don’t like the fact we’re finally playing a game (still not as good as Republicans) are on judges, too bad.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Zack's avatar

    I see that a right wing group has filed judicial misconduct claims against James Wynn, saying he took back his retirement for political reasons.
    Funny how they didn’t have an issue with Karen K. Caldwell in Kentucky.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Haaaaaa… I hope they enjoy wasting ink. What a joke. I love how consistency & hypocrisy never seems to make these people bat an eye. If Democrats had good leadership, it would be so easy to defeat these folks. They are only winning because senate Democrats are lazy & can’t count.

      Like

  36. Mitch's avatar

    With new Senators taking office, it’ll effect judicial confirmations. I had noted that in Pennsylvania, Bob Casey and Pat Toomey were very different people both politically and personally. But they established a good working relationship. Part of that were judicial packages that were regarded as satisfactory.

    Now the two Senators will be John Fetterman and David McCormick. They are also two very different people. Will they click as co-workers as well? It will effect future vacancies in Pennsylvania.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Zack's avatar

    https://www.wsj.com/opinion/federal-judges-unretiring-james-wynn-donald-trump-chuck-schumer-d700a3db#comments_sector

    I know it’s behind a paywall but the part of the Wall Street Journal op-ed you can read is laughable.
    James Wynn wasn’t part of any bipartisan senate deal and is under no obilation to let a far right Federalist Society replace him or reward Republicans for smearing Ryan Park the way they did.
    I hope Sheldon Whitehouse who has done a good job of calling out the federalist society points out that at their event last month, you literally had conservative judges doing champagne toasts at certain SCOTUS rulings.
    Throw in the obivious auditions for SCOTUS that hacks like James Ho and Lawrence VanDyke are doing and to see Mike Davis (who filed the complaint) Tillis/McConnell etc. claiming this tainted the judiciary is laughable.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Zack's avatar

      Sadly accurate article in many ways.
      There were a few flips (sadly the 3rd will go back to a majority conservative court soon) but Biden’s overall legacy was not as impactful as Trump’s was.
      I will say this, not a total loss.
      For the most part, Biden’s legacy ensured liberal jurists weren’t replaced by far right hacks (expect for the last four nominees left) and we DID see some flips of some conservative seats like Frank Kanne and Joel Flaum on the 7th Circuit.
      And for the 2nd Circuit, if Trump/McConnell were still calling the shots, it would easily be among the most conservative circuit courts in the nation, possibly even worse then the 5th and 8th because from 2021 to 2023, three members of the liberal/moderate wing of the court died.
      I’m glad Biden/Senate Democrats were the ones getting to pick the replacements there aren’t you?
      One final thing, Trump/McConnell didn’t flip the 11th Circuit as much as uphold the status quo there, as both Frank Hull and Julie Carnes were Republican judges nominated as part of package deals for liberal jurists.
      On the 11th Circuit, as I’ve said before, while Schumer deserves to be called out on a few things in regards to judges, Harry Reid wasn’t perfect either.
      George W got far too many hacks confirmed after Democrats had the Senate and the blue slip rule for Circuit court seats should have been trashed the same time the nuclear option was done.
      We would have flipped a couple of Circuit courts and moderated others if not for that.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rick's avatar

        Democrats really blew it at the beginning of Obama’s first 2 years, when they had between 58-60 senate seats. I remember it took a while to certify Al Franken’s race as he won on the recount, and Sen Kennedy was out for a long period in 2009 before cancer claimed his life in August of that year. They should have ditched blue slips back then and moved much faster on judges. Goodwin Lu would be on the 9th Circuit, Victoria Nourse on the 7th Circuit, and a couple others I can’t remember of top of my head.

        I guess considering we had to deal with Manchin and Sinema, tons of COVID absences, Feinstein and Fetterman out long time in 2023, and only 51-49 majority at best, had a good number of confirmations. Also made a big dent in the 7th Circuit, which was 9-2 GOP majority when Biden took office, and is now 6-5.

        I do wish Dale Ho would have been a circuit nominee, as in trade him for Childs on DC Circuit.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Joe's avatar

        Biden’s impact is not as much as Trumps, but in his defense I don’t really think there’s much Biden could’ve done to change this, even if the 5 remaining circuit vacancies had been filled.

        Now, had Sotomayor retired and Clarence Thomas or Samuel Alito abruptly left the bench and they were replaced by Justice Nathan and Justice Heytens then I think Biden would be right there.

        Liked by 2 people

    • lilee2122's avatar

      Biden has got 185 district judges confirmed with 2 to go.. In doing so he has filled up those seats in many states, seats that affect everyday people..Just like a hotel no vacancy sign….I’m happy he got so many filled before the GOP had a chance to …. Dem senators have to be vigilant.on Trump nominees to weed out those extremists.. In 2028 the Democrat president will correct the judicial again..As I’ve seen every other president is of a different party in.modern times.

      Liked by 2 people

  40. Gavi's avatar

    I am not the biggest fan of David Lat’s analyses, in general, but I think on balance, he got it right in this article. Most of what he said have been what I have been saying all these years about Biden’s ongoing judicial legacy. Many will worship Biden as the best Dem judicial appointer, but honestly that bar is very low, not least because of factors outside of Biden’s (an previous Dem presidents’) control. With the advantages that Biden has had that no other Dem president enjoyed, you would hope that he’d do better than they did. In my opinion, at best, Biden *just* meet that mark. I cannot blame Obama for Julie Carnes but I can certainly blame Biden for Irma Ramirez (be patient, pretty soon you’ll never hear me talk about this nomination in the near future).

    As the article highlighted, Biden can rest well with the knowledge that he’s appointed more people of different identity background. But Ramirez’s identity won’t help her write opinions to respond to James Ho’s hackery (for however much longer they remain benchmates on the same court). Whereas lily white Toby Heytens, someone I’ve praised repeatedly on here, has turned out to be great. So, for me, I much more value his professional diversity (law school professor) than anything else I could have gotten from Ramirez.

    If the goal was the pause the devastating appointments to federal courts, Biden’s record is good. Unfortunately, I do not think his appointments reversed the trends. The stridency of Trump’s appointees will outweigh the moderation of Biden’s beautifully diverse normie appointees. All you have left is to hope that this moderation will win over others, or for Trump appointees’ hackery to turn off fellow judges. But let’s be honest, this will be only the straw you’ll have to hang on to in the sea of these appointees’ legal rulings.

    Biden’s legacy would have been much more important if he’s not succeeded by Trump. As with everything else in the federal government, Biden merely delayed Trump, not stop him. Expect an even more robust nomination record for Trump. Republican senators are by and large fine with rubberstamping the crazies that Trump is expected to nominate next year. No reason to think that they’ll draw the line at judicial nominees. Remember, we’ll live in a Collins/Murkowski-proof Republican Senate.

    Going forward, Democrats need to fundamentally rethink their approach to the judiciary. The party’s leaders prove to be incapable of fully doing this, so it’ll have to start with its voters. Lest the very best we can ever hope for is calling a just OK record a victory.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Zack's avatar

    I’ll be blunt, Democratic voters in 2016 showed they didn’t care about SCOTUS or lower courts and sadly showed that again this year, choosing to do purity tests over the greater good.

    Until that changes and they realize the courts matter, Democratic senators won’t care about the courts the way they should.

    Also, the reality is as good as Obama was on a lot of issues, he dropped the ball on judges to a large degree.
    First, in taking too long to start issuing nominations because his advisors didn’t care about the judicial branch as much as others did and having many of his nominees be in their mid 50’s or older and many of them being folks who didn’t care if a far right hack replaced them.
    That led to flips under Trump that shouldn’t have happened.

    Also, sorry, you had the history of Bill Clinton/W to show there were two different sets of standards for blue slips, Obama/Harry Reid could and should have put their foot on them, instead of gifting Republicans with several Circuit court seats.

    Also, Trump has nothing to do with the judges picked under him other then the fact he won, he just goes off the list the Federalist Society/Heritage Foundation gives him, just like George W did.

    Finally, I don’t like the Ramirez nomination/confirmation either because of her age but she or others could write the best responses in the world to James Ho and it wouldn’t matter to me.

    Dissents, no matter how great they are, are written by the losing side and with the SCOTUS we have right now, liberals will be on the losing side for decades to come.

    Solid dissents won’t change that.
    If nothing else, that logic was used by RBG stans to justify her not retiring when she could have.

    How did that work out?

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Joe's avatar

    I agree with Zack. Maybe it’s because I am not a lawyer, but I can’t bother myself to care one bit about dissents. As far as I’m concerned, Ramirez can simply say “I disagree with the majority” and leave it at that for any en banc hearings on the 5th.

    What I care about from judges is rulings. And also more generally filling existing vacancies so that citizens receive justice.

    Liked by 2 people

  43. tsb1991's avatar

    Dixon received her commission to the CDCA on the 16th.

    After the vote on the Social Security bill, Van Hollen came out to try to individually confirm the local DC judges on voice votes, but Marshall did his best Tuberville impression and objected to each request, without any explanation for the objection. For a party that prides itself on law and order and tough on crime, you’d think they’d help get judges confirmed which can help address the issue. The sad thing is is that unless anybody’s confirmed during this session, it will probably be a year before any further local DC judges are concerned given their lower priority the Senate tends to give them, and most of the time they tend to be end-of-year confirmations.

    It sounds like the two cloture votes for the remaining district nominees will be held today. We actually had a fully-attended Senate on the Social Security bill vote (which got over 70 votes so the Senate will likely spend additional time getting that over the finish line), so chances are we’ll see 51-49 vote on both judges?

    Liked by 2 people

  44. Mike's avatar

    Good summary about Bidens judicial legacy but I think his judges won’t make a name for themselves until lawsuits during the Trump administration come into their courts.

    It’s hard to make a name for yourself right now when you’re basically making rulings on policies that you support but we’ll see, liberals don’t have think tanks funded by right wing billionaires to sit and think about how to sway the country against the will of the majority every day.

    Maybe now they will because like with everything else, Dems always play catch up and learn by watching Republicans.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. tsb1991's avatar

    The way I look at Biden’s judicial legacy is that it’s honestly impressive, given how small his Senate majorities were and for at least the first two years, he could only get as far as a Democratic Senator from a state he lost by 40 points (and come January, the party will be completely extinct in West Virginia). Trump for the last two years of his first term (and for the upcoming two years) had and will have 53 seats and a Collins/Murkowski-proof majority (and Collins/Murkowski IMO are less likely to defect than Manchin and Sinema would), so he won’t have any issues getting anybody he nominates confirmed. Republicans will also rarely have to worry about attendance since even if you have full Democratic attendance, Republicans can still have a functioning majority with up to five absences (even at six absences you’d just need Vance around).

    I know some of the most flashy nominations are the ones that flip seats, but it’s just as important to lock down what you control. I know Biden’s DC Circuit nominees weren’t the greatest but by being able to replace all three Clinton appointees, two of which were at or over 80, you lock in a 7-4 Democratic majority for a while, and Trump’s only shot at a nomination at this court will be when Karen Henderson inevitably gives her notice to go senior (I give it by the end of January). Had Trump been re-elected, I know someone here had mentioned it but the 2nd Circuit would have been gone for a while, due to the deaths of a few judges that happened in Biden’s presidency. I wouldn’t also have ruled out Cabranes retiring under Trump, I feel he was going to retire regardless who had the presidency.

    It popped into my mind while typing this but one of the biggest things about Kidd getting confirmed to the 11th Circuit is that you completely cut off Aileen Cannon’s most direct path for a promotion, but given that DC Circuit nominees can be from out of state, I wonder if she’d be on Trump’s shortlist for Henderson’s seat (Childs and Walker were from courts out of state that I know of off the top of my head, for example).

    Liked by 3 people

  46. Dequan's avatar

    Senator Booker is on the senate floor right now talking about the Mangi nomination. He is talking about how hurt he is to speak to his children through all the attacks about their dad. He is now reading parts of Mangi’s letter from the article the other day.

    Liked by 1 person

  47. Joe's avatar

    It’s a damn shame about Mangi. I still don’t understand the staunch opposition of the NV senators on that one and never will. I couldn’t imagine the opposite scenario ever happening and Rubio/Scott randomly tanking a GOP nominee because he had ties to a Bible college or whatever.

    Liked by 2 people

  48. Zack's avatar

    @Mitch, Far too many progressives/moderates took the Warren years for granted and didn’t get that was the exception for SCOTUS, not the norm and refused to believe conservatives would undo rulings.

    @Dequan, the Mangi nomination was botched from the beginning, from how long it took to nominate him for the 3rd Circuit to letting the vote for him linger which gave the bad guys more time to dig up stuff to use on him to sadly not accepting defeat on him when it became clear Democratic senators beyond Manchin/Sinema opposed him.

    As for Rosen/Masto, it’s the reality of politics in NV and some other states in that Democratic senators are going to be more conservative on some issues like criminal justice to a degree and certain nominees might get in trouble if there’s a high profile case the right can take advantage of, especially since many folks still buy the Democrats want to defund police garbage (which was a stupid slogan by the way.)
    That sadly happened with Mangi.
    I knew the minute I saw the name Kathy Boudin I knew his nomination was likely doomed and I was sadly right, despite some folks here telling me I was an idiot who didn’t know what he was talking about.

    I will say this, Rosen and Masto will likely vote no on the horrible nominee picked under Trump, a nominee that wouldn’t be there if they hadn’t backed Manchin/Sinema but at the end of the day, the blame will have to go to Biden/Schumer.
    If it’s made clear a nominee is doomed, sometimes you have to bite the bullet for the greater good even when it’s not fair (like with Goodwin Liu) and move on.

    They did with Michael Delaney, they should have done so here.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Frank's avatar

      They didn’t move on with Delaney though. They stuck with him like with Mangi, but he eventually withdrew on his own accord and it was only after that they they go out and seek a replacement. In fact, was there even a single Biden judicial appointment that was withdrawn by the administration during the middle of a Congressional session during his entire term? I can’t think of one of the top of my head although there had to have been at least one, correct?

      Liked by 1 person

  49. Zack's avatar

    @Joe, Under Trump, Halil Ozerden’s nomination to the 5th Circuit was derailed because Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz didn’t like a ruling he made upholding the birth control mandate in the ACA as a district court judge and saw to it he didn’t make it past the judiciary committee.
    Ryan Bounds likewise saw his nomination to the 9th Circuit saw his nomination derailed because of essays he wrote in college saying vandalizing statues supporting LGBT rights among other things wasn’t a big deal and that criminal justice reformers focused too much on racism in the criminal justice system.
    Tim Scott helped derail his nomination after that.
    So yes, it DID happen under Trump a couple of times where one or two Republican senators doomed a nominee.
    The difference is once it was clear the nominations were doomed, they were withdrawn and other nominees put in their place.
    That didn’t happen here sadly and thus Republicans will get a chance to put a Sam Alito clone in that seat, another self inflicted wound by Democrats.

    Liked by 1 person

  50. Gavi's avatar

    @Frank,

    Administrations don’t usually “withdraw” nominations on its own, even when the withdrawal is clearly something the WH wants. It’s usually the nominees that request that their nominations be withdrawn (even if with some nudging). It’s a face-saving thing. At the end of the year, though, the WH will decide against renomination.

    On the Mangi nomination, there’s so much blame to go around.

    Certainly the NV senators should get a huge share. But also Schumer. My goodness, I am very ashamed to say that I thought Schumer somehow had a secret plan to get him confirmed, because why else wouldn’t he go back to the NJ senators and the WH and tell them that there’s just no possible path, not in the pre-election sessions or in the lame duck, so that they could go back and find a new nominee quickly.

    I’m sorry to also blame the victim, but Mangi isn’t blameless. he could have done exactly what Michael Delaney did and withdraw his name. This has always been the easiest way to get a new nominee. (Don’t even get me started with Kanter. It’s political malpractice that 2 Dem senators in the majority and with a Dem WH can’t fill a district court seat in their state.)

    And of course, the WH should have been pushing Schumer for a more credible assessment of Mangi’s confirmation odds. And the WH should have been nudging Mangi to the fact that the nomination is dead so that he could withdraw.

    All this could have been done behind closed doors without it looking like anyone is trying to push out the first potential Muslim CA judge.

    Botched botched botched.

    Speaking of withdrawals, what is Karla Campbell waiting on? The sine die adjournment? She should have done that the day after Ryan Park’s withdrawal. We simply cannot afford to botch another circuit seat.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to shawnee68 Cancel reply