An End – And a Beginning

So it’s finally here.  After nearly eight years, and more than four hundred nominee profiles, it’s time to close the final chapter on the Vetting Room.  When I first started the Vetting Room eight years ago, I wrote my hopes that this blog would be a way to “inform the general public about candidates for the federal bench.”  I think we’ve succeeded in doing that.  I also hoped that, by providing “disinterested” commentary (in the sense that we’re not advocating for or against individual nominees), the Vetting Room could be a part of de-escalating confirmation tensions and supporting an apolitical judiciary.

Reflecting back, there is much to be proud of.  I never expected that a small legal blog started by a nobody with some assistance from his friends and associates would become one of the most widely searched resources on judicial nominees.  Furthermore, I’ve received messages of praise and support from prominent liberals and conservatives who have praised the tone and content of our write-ups.  Similarly, I’ve fielded angry messages and comments both from folks convinced that we’re secretly suppressing unfavorable information on nominees and from those accusing us of writing hit pieces, in one case, addressing a single article.  Needless to say, we must be doing something right.

I’m also thankful for all the support we’ve gotten, not just from the amazing attorneys who wrote for us, but also from attorneys and law students who helped with research, and from fellow legal bloggers and lawyers who shared, retweeted and commented on our posts.  I would note that Howard Bashman of How Appealing has been particularly generous with sharing our write-ups and with his support.

Given all this, one might wonder why the Vetting Room is shuttering.  Especially with an incoming Administration that is likely to push to reshape the judiciary in a more conservative direction, and likely to be the source of dozens, if not hundreds, of posts.  Well, see, that’s the thing.

Writing and managing a legal blog is not cost-less. Several hours of research, wordsmithing, and analysis go into each post, not just in how to frame each nominee’s background, but also in determining what information should or should not be included. Time spent here is time not spent with my family, or pursuing other passions and interests. Having kept up with the blog through four years of a Republican President and four years of a Democratic President, now seems like the right time to move on.

The Vetting Room is not being taken down, and the posts that are here will stay on (at least for the near future).  As time dictates, additional posts detailing the history of the judiciary (some of my favorite writing but ones I’ve had trouble keeping up with) may be added.

This is not to say that it is time to disengage from judicial nominations entirely. Our founding fathers intended for the confirmation process to include public review and input. In the end, all Americans have an interest in having a Judiciary that decides based on the rule of law, rather than ideology or partisanship. And I expect that vigilance in the process will not cease.

Perhaps, if other interested attorneys come forward who would want to carry the mantle for an apolitical judiciary, the Vetting Room may revive as such. Until then, I thank all the readers this blog has maintained for their support and encouragement, and hope that, in our own way, we’ve had a positive impact on the judicial nomination discourse.

1,579 Comments

  1. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Just found out there’s a supreme court election as well in Georgia. Two progressive challengers, Miracle Rankin and Jen Jordan, against two Republican-appointed justices

    Honestly, with the lack of polling and the fact that Georgia Dems shockingly overpowered in last year’s Public Service Commission elections, this race could also be a sleeper hit for Dems

    Also if anyone’s knowledgeable enough bout the Georgia Supreme Court, what is its ideological balance? Based on Wikipedia, it’s 8 Republican-appointed justices and 1 independent justice but I know the justices won’t always match their appointing governor’s political party.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Mitch's avatar

    Today the SJC had its hearing and as expected, most of the Democrats’ attention was focused on Justin Smith, the nominee for the Eighth Circuit. The Democrats repeatedly brought up the 2020 election outcome, to the point that John Kennedy called them “ridiculous.” Smith promised that he would be independent of political pressure.

    Three nominees for the District Court in Kansas were also questioned, but they came out unscathed. Democrats forcused nearly all their attention on Smith.

    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/trump-lawyer-nominated-for-appeals-court-pledges-independence

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      The Kansas nominees seem about as reasonable as you can expect in Trump 2.0. Justin Smith is a perfect example of why elections have consequences. Had Democrats held on in the senate race in Pennsylvania & won the senate races in Wisconsin & North Carolina, Smith wouldn’t even be an afterthought of being confirmed.

      Like

  3. Mitch's avatar

    The U.S. Senate just invoked cloture on the nomination of Andrew Bray of the Western Texas District. A notable aside- Susan Collins voted with the Democrats against this nomination.

    The SJC will be having a vote on some nominees on April 23,

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Andrew Bray Davis is so bad that AFJ explicitly opposes his nomination. Davis defended Fox News for giving a platform to Trump’s election lies (which, ironically, involved admitting that MAGA is crazy by arguing that “no reasonable person” would believe the election lies).

      The one good thing about Davis’s confirmation is that the court will be fully staffed again, which will be a relief for the 95% of everyday trial court cases that aren’t politically motivated. With Davis’ confirmation, the divisions will look something like this:

      Austin: Pitman, Albright (formerly in Waco), Davis, Nowlin, Ezra
      Del Rio: Moses, Gonzalez
      El Paso: Cardone, Schydlower, Briones, Guaderrama
      Midland/Pecos: Counts
      San Antonio: Biery, Garcia, Rodriguez, Pulliam
      Waco: Wolfe

      The best place in WDTX for liberals to file would be either El Paso or San Antonio, while Midland/Pecos and Waco remain single-judge divisions with a Trump judge. Unclear how bad Counts and Wolfe are but Albright & Pulliam are actually not as bad as you would expect for a Trump judge in Texas (the worst ones seem to be located in the Northern & Eastern districts).

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Ryan J's avatar

    In other news, the abortion pill is back in the news. Judge David Joseph (W.D. Louisiana) is hearing a challenge to the 2023 FDA policy allowing the mailing of abortion pills. Joseph declined to block the 2023 policy for now, but hinted that he might in the future. He gave the Trump administration 6 months (starting April 7th, 2026) to detail the FDA’s next steps. It’s pretty clear that the Trump administration is trying to wait until after the midterms to deal with this issue, and I think that judges like David Joseph understand that.

    I dug into how cases are assigned there and found that the case could have been assigned to 4 judges (all Republican-appointed). David Joseph is no Kacsmaryk but he still is willing to put pressure on the Trump administration to ban the abortion pill, after the midterms if not now.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Zack Jones's avatar

    @Dequan

    Susan Collins has done this routine of pretending to be horrified by some nominees so she won’t vote for them going back to the W years with nominees like Bill Pryor.

    In every case though, the nominees had the votes to get confirmed.

    If a bad nominee needs the vote, she’ll provide it without fail but people think she’s a moderate anyway.

    Makes me sick.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    According to current reports Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas are NOT retiring any time soon. And I’m not alone in hoping this ends up backfiring like RBG refusing to retire back in 2013

    May this motivates Democrats to get that desired 51-seat or even 52 seat majority this coming midterms lest far-right hacks like Matthew Kacsmaryk and Kathryn Kimball Mizelle end up replacing them

    Liked by 5 people

  8. Mitch's avatar

    I found an article from the site ‘Balls & Strikes” written by progressive law professor JP Collins. An interesting aside on it, Collins, who’s also a supporter of Federal Court reform, states that he personally knows Matthew Schwartz, Trump’s nominee for the Second Circuit. They worked together at Sullivan and Cromwell for five years and worked together on several cases. Collins describes Schwartz as a smart and honorable man and says they got along together really well.

    In 2006, David Lat wrote an article for ‘Above the Law,” that mentions Schwartz and speaks well of him, calling him “a very decent guy who won’t push his politics on you.”

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mitch's avatar

    Is anybody in the mood for comedy? Congressman Rich McCormick and others have sponsored a bill to place Alexandria and Arlington County in the District of Columbia. They say it’s about an obscure law from 1846. Of course, the redistricting vote on April 21 has nothing to do with it.

    Marjorie Taylor Greene must be kicking herself for not having thought of this.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Mitch's avatar

    Tomorrow the SJC is holding a hearing for four nominees,

    Michael Hendershot: Sixth Circuit

    Jeffrey Kuntz: Middle Florida

    Rob Jones: Southern Texas

    John Marck: Southern Texas

    You can bet that J.D. Vance recommended Hendershot, they’ve known each other for decades. He may get questions about state voter ID laws.

    Kurtz will likely be questioned about a defamation case he heard on the state court which involved Donald Trump.

    I don’t think the Texas nominees will face much trouble.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    With the recent news of Callais and its gutting of the VRA, I’ve been looking at states where Dems could gain trifectas and state supreme courts which leaves them open to tactical gerrymander to offset potential redistricting loses in the South

    Take for example Arizona

    This November, they could gain both state chambers but to gain the Supreme Court there, it’s imperative Katie Hobbs secure a 2nd term since two justices (Bolick and Chief Justice Timmer) will reach mandatory retirement age by then. However, even with that, it’ll still only be a 4-3 Republican majority…

    Unless Dems take a page from Republicans and actually invest in retention elections against Republicans judges. This coming November, it’s Vice Chief Lopez IV and in 2028, it’s Justices Beene and Montgomery. If they’re successful, then they could very well get a 6-1 Democratic majority by 2030

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mike's avatar

      Always nice to see my state mentioned here but Arizona redistricting is done via an independent commission per our state constitution. If we wanted to gerrymander, we’d likely need a ballot initiative to overturn or temporary supercede the congressional districts which is not something that’ll happen here. Our Republican gov. in 2012 tried to void the commission map but was overruled by the courts.

      P.S. Fun Fact: The “independent” tie breaking chairwoman in our 2022 redistricting committee, that the Dems agreed with the Reps on, was a registered republican her entire life until 2016.

      No surprise something like 2/3 of her tie breaking votes on boundary lines were with the 2 Republican members of the committee. I wouldn’t put a lot of faith in Arizona’s Dems being as competent as CA or VA.

      Liked by 2 people

  15. Rick's avatar

    I hope that Maine 2026 is not a repeat of 2020 Maine, where Democratic nominee Sara Gideon seemed to lead throughout the campaign but lost by rather convincing margin.

    Now, this is certainly looking like a throw the bums out election, and that bolds well for Platner. And Trump 2.0 is far, far worse than Trump 1.0.

    Plus, he’s been ahead in polls above margin of error.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Ryan J's avatar

    I was on Instagram this morning and I saw a video of Sen. Blumenthal asking this question to Michael Hendershot, Rob Jones, John Marck, & Jeffrey Kuntz: “Who won the 2020 election?”

    Hendershot went first and said “Joe Biden was certified as the winner of the 2020 election”. The other three all said “What he said” when they were asked the same question. Blumenthal then called them cowards and pointed out that they are afraid of President Trump. It’s deeply concerning that these four soon-to-be Trump judges (and probably many more) refuse to acknowledge that Joe Biden was the legitimate winner of the 2020 election. Props to Blumenthal for exposing them as cowards (at best) or at worst, hacks who will rule however Trump tells them to.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      The Pennsylvania Supreme Court isn’t as liberal as people make it out to be. Even before David Wecht’s switch, he and Kevin Dougherty sometimes sided with the court’s 2 Republicans in major cases.

      While I think Wecht is generally a pretty fair and balanced judge, he authored the infamous ruling overturning Bill Cosby’s conviction.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Dequan's avatar

    We have our first sitting judges nominated in Trump 2.0 to circuit court seats. Daniel Domenico to the Tenth Circuit & Daniel Traynor to the Eighth.

    Also two Texas nominees & more infuriating, a nominee to a purple state (Fetterman I’m sure is playing nice) & a blue state Michigan.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Not surprised that Traynor and Domenico are the first sitting district judges to be elevated, as both have recently ruled in favor of ICE’s mandatory detention policy, possibly to “prove their loyalty” to Trump.

      I don’t know too much about any of the district court nominees, but none of them have immediate red flags.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Mitch's avatar

    Here is a list of the judicial nominees for today:

    Daniel Traynor: judge on the U.S. District Court of North Dakota, former lawyer specializing in insurance and personal injury law, for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. I’m kind of surprised, one of the U.S. Senators must have pushed for him.

    Daniel Dominico: Chief Judge for the U.S. District Court of Colorado, former state Solicitor General, for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Senator Michael Bennet played nice and supported him for his current post, I don’t expect a repeat performance this year. Unless there’s some kind of compromise on his successor on District Court agreed to.

    Kasdin Mitchell: currently a partner at Kirkland & Ellis at its Dallas office, for the District of Northern Texas. She was a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Energy, and a former Press Secretary for First Lady Laura Bush. Recently she represented facebook and won a $12 billion settlement against the government.

    Angela Colmenaro: Deputy Chief of Staff and former Deputy Counsel for Texas Governor Greg Abbot, who lobbied for her, for the District Court of Southern Texas. Also a former Assistant state Attorney General.

    Antonio Pozos: currently a white collar defense lawyer at the white shoe law firm of Faerge Drinker in Philadelphia, former AUSA for Eastern Pennsylvania, specialized in fraud and corruption cases. Is he Trump’s first Hispanic nominee for his second term? In any case, he doesn’t seem to be controversial, I wont be surprised for John Fetterman to return a blue slip.

    Michael Martin: AUSA of Eastern Michigan for 20 years, currently Chief of its Criminal Division. Won some fame for prosecuting the Underwear Bomber, who attempted a terrorist bombing on a passenger airplane. Elissa Slotkin got dinged for being one of the “sedition six,” perhaps she wants to play nice for publicity on this nomination, who seems to be a consensus nominee.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      I believe Angela Colmenaro is also Hispanic. A batch with two Hispanic, two woman & two sitting judges for circuit court nominees from Trump 2.0. You can definitely tell we are getting close to the midterms.

      I am almost sure Fetterman will turn in his blue slip for Pozos. I would be less surprised if Slotkin turns in her blue slip then if Peters turned his in. I still am holding out hope Grassley will ditch blue slips because I doubt Democrats ever will on their own but it’s more likely the White House cleared both nominees with the three Democrat senators.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mitch's avatar

        I found something interesting on Michael Martin. He clerked for Judge Edward Harrington for the District of Massachusetts and Henry Bownes for the First Circuit Court of Appeals Bownes was appointed by Jimmy Carter after serving as a District Judge appointed by LBJ. Harrington was appointed by Ronald Reagan, but had been U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts during the Carter Administration.

        Liked by 2 people

  23. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Some good news from West Virginia of all places

    Three Republican judges backed by far-right funding were defeated yesterday. Their opponents were moderate Republicans which, while not liberal judges, are still miles better than far-right judges

    Anyhow, I’m hoping this means Georgia’s Supreme Court races is about to go supremely well for the liberal candidates, most especially Jen Jordan and Miracle Rankin

    Liked by 2 people

  24. Mitch's avatar

    There’s more speculation on two of Trump’s latest nominations.

    John Fetterman of Pennsylvania recently said that he hasn’t discussed any judicial nominees with the White House and hasn’t made up his mind on the Antonio Pozos nomination.

    Both of Michigan’s Democratic U.S. Senators put out a general statement but were noncommittal on the Michael Martin nomination. They didn’t respond to questions about whether they discussed Martin by name in negotiations. Like Fetterman, they’re undecided.

    Here’s an article:

    https://www.courthousenews.com/michigan-pennsylvania-democrats-mum-on-support-for-trump-federal-court-picks/

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mike S.'s avatar

      Thanks for sharing this article, as well as your in depth and insightful write-ups of nominees.

      If I had to guess, I suspect both nominees with be confirmed (at some point). No rush for either nominee, considering both courts are adequately staffed and this could be a bargaining tool for other nominations.

      I suspect that once we have another Democrat in the White House and a Democratic Senate, the Dems will do a way with the blue slip for district court picks. I think it is only a matter of time at this point…

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I’m not sure what Democrats he can see that will ditch blue slips first. For the most part, this is the same caucus that willingly handed Trump a then-five circuit court seats. My hope is Republicans ditch it so we can finally be done with them by the next time Democrats are in power.

        Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        It’s possible Slotkin knew him with being fairly moderate & her background. I still can’t believe any White House would nominate a district court nominee in a state with at least one US senator of the opposite Party without prior consultation. I know it happen, but it doesn’t make any sense in the world to me.

        Like

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Staton dissented in Juliana v. United States, the kids’ climate cases. She took a position that not one 9th circuit judge would take publicly. Staton also upheld California’s Prop 50. I hope Trump does not get to pick the successor to such an amazing liberal judge, and I’m a little disappointed about Staton’s decision to retire (I wouldn’t be super surprised if Staton does outright retire soon after going senior, as a lot of C.D. Cal. judges seem to do that).

      Also, if the Republicans win the midterms and Grassley subsequently axes blue slips, do you think that would lead some of the older conservative judges in blue states who would have otherwise stayed put to take senior status?

      Liked by 1 person

  26. IrvineOnlooker's avatar

    Finalists for the Minnesota Supreme Court vacancy in September by Chief Justice Hudson

    https://www.startribune.com/finalists-mn-chief-justice-natalie-hudson/601842162

    • Associate Justice Anne McKeig (1967)
    • Associate Justice Paul Thissen (1966)
    • Associate Justice Theodora Gaitas (1971)

    Also the shortlist for the Associate Justice vacancy for whichever Justice is elevated to Chief

    • Reynaldo Aligada (1977)
    • Keala Ede (1978)
    • Elizabeth Bentley (1986)
    • Juanita Freeman (1983)

    I would personally go with Thissen for Chief Judge and either Judge Ede or Judge Bentley for the Associate Justice position.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Dequan's avatar

    Senator Cassidy has just lost his primary election in Louisiana tonight. Rep. Julia Letlow & state Treasurer John Fleming advanced to a runoff. This is sad news because Senator Cassidy is one of the best Republican senators there is. He had the courage to do the right thing & vote to impeach Trump.

    Had a couple more Republican senators like McConnell have that same courage, perhaps the country wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in now with Trump 2.0. I applaud Senator Cassidy. Job well done sir

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      I’m glad he had the courage to impeach Trump, although as his primary got closer, he caved to Trump, such as his votes to confirm RFK and pass the Big Buttugly Bill. Clearly, today is proof that Cassidy’s caving didn’t work, and that there are some things Trump never forgives or forgets about, and grudges he holds no matter how illogical.

      I hope Cassidy goes scorched earth and votes against Trump frequently from today until the end of his term. If it doesn’t stop any of the bad stuff from happening, it will at least expose how Collins, Murkowski, & others are merely controlled opposition and will make sure Trump has exactly the # of votes he needs to pass his far-right agenda.

      Liked by 1 person

  28. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Aside from Bill Cassidy’s primary defeat, there were other disappointing news for moderate Republicans in Louisiana

    In the primary for District 1 of the Louisiana Supreme Court, Judge Billy Burris defeated Judge Blair Downing Edwards by 58% to 42%

    While both were conservative judges, Burris is no doubt more conservative and I’d say borderline right-wing due to a PAC connected to far-right legal activist Leonard Leo investing $2.8 million dollars in him

    With no opponents, he is guaranteed to win the election, thus maintaining the 4-3 Republican majority in the court

    Let’s hope better news comes out Georgia in the next few days

    Liked by 2 people

  29. Mitch's avatar

    Tomorrow, the U.S. Senate is voting on cloture and confirmation of Sheria Clarke for District Judge in South Carolina. She appears likely to get some Democratic votes.

    It’ll also be voting on cloture on Evan Rikhye to be judge of the Virgin Islands. It’ll likely be a closer vote.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Mitch's avatar

    There was an earlier posting here on the Georgia Supreme Court (I can’t find it).

    Justice Sarah Hawkins Warren was reelected with about 60% of the vote. This blog once mentioned her as a possible nominee to be a future Federal judge.

    The reelection of Justice Charles Bethel is too close to call. He currently leads Michelle Rankin by a 51% to 49% margin.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Unfortunately, Bethel won. Democrats keep coming short in Georgia Supreme Court elections, despite winning in other swing states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania. Even having one Democrat would be nice, as having even 1 dissenting justice will bring attention to cases that would otherwise have flown under the radar.

      Liked by 1 person

  31. Mitch's avatar

    The SJC had a major hearing today. They were reviewing the nominations of Benjamin Flowers for the Sixth Circuit and Matthew Schwartz for the Second Circuit.

    Schwartz got a lot of questions on his past legal work for Trump. In his testimony, he stated “What I will do is commit to you that, if I’m confirmed and take the oath of office, to be impartial and to rule without fear or favor. That will be an oath that I will take extraordinarily seriously and will not violate if I’m put on the Second Circuit.”

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Ryan J's avatar

    Also yesterday, Trump endorsed Ken Paxton in Texas, which likely makes Paxton the next senator. This doesn’t change much since Cruz is already there to gum things up, but assuming Paxton wins and blue slips stay, it will make trying to fill Texas district court vacancies even more of a nightmare for the next Democratic president.

    The real turning point for Texas vacancies was 2012, when moderate Republican Kay Hutchison retired and Cruz took office. Since then, the Texas judges have been further to the right (and much more heavily male). Most of the liberals and reasonable conservatives on Texas’s district courts are pre-2012 appointees now in their sixties and seventies. Unless blue slips are abolished, the Texas district courts could be completely filled by MAGA hacks (or whatever MAGA turns into after Trump) in a decade or two.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    The Georgia Supreme Court races were disappointing to say the least. Clearly, there was a lack of proper voter education and advertising considering the distance between the margins of victory of Bethel and Hawkins Warren (2% to 19%)

    Nonetheless, I choose to look at the bright side. I’ll remind y’all again, no incumbent Georgia Supreme Court justice has lost reelection in over 100 years. So the fact that Miracle Rankin, in her first run, got within 45k votes to toppling an incumbent judge is praiseworthy in of itself (Jen Jordan flopped though). Maybe she could run again in the Supreme Court race in 2028

    And I believe we shouldn’t be too demoralized. After all, this is only the 2nd time Georgia Dems actually put in effort into contesting the judicial races. Mind you, it took Wisconsin Dems a while before they figured out what to do and look at them now, a 5-2 liberal supermajority on the SCOWIS with a 6-1 most likely coming next year

    Let’s see if Georgia Dems learnt their lesson in 2028 where three justices are up for reelection. And if they defeat all of them that year, Democrats would be in prime position to flip the court come 2030, just in time for redistricting

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Yes, I saw that!! A rare breath of relief, and a very interesting lineup. Had it been an actual opinion rather than a DIG, Sotomayor would get to assign the majority opinion since the 3 most senior justices (Roberts, Thomas, Alito) all dissented (as did Gorsuch). I can only think of 2 other times Roberts, Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch have dissented together (McWilliams v. Dunn in 2017 and Apple v. Pepper in 2019), and in both of those decisions only 1 conservative sided with the court’s 4 liberals.

      Thomas and Gorsuch dissented in a previous iteration of this case, and Alito’s vote is no surprise. But I don’t exactly know why Roberts decided to join them in dissent. One theory (from a Slate article about Callais v. Louisiana) is that because Roberts is now 71 years old, he is ditching the incrementalist approach that he championed as late as 2023 and he wants to change things fast like Alito and Thomas.

      Liked by 1 person

  35. Ryan J's avatar

    There’s been an uptick in district court vacancies, per future judicial vacancies. Some of the vacancies include
    * Alan Albright (WDTX), circa 8/31/26 (not yet on FJV)
    * Josephine Staton (C.D. Cal.), 9/19/26
    * Thomas O. Rice (EDWA), 12/15/26 (not yet on FJV)
    * William Osteen (MDNC), 1/2/27
    * David G. Kays (WDMO), 5/11/27

    Honestly, I don’t really care much about district court vacancies outside of CA (because it’s my home state), TX (because it’s where right wing judges make rulings that can force changes nationwide), or a handful of judges that I really admire.

    Also, re: Dequan’s prediction that Padilla and Schiff will keep the Staton seat open. I think that they will hold Staton’s seat open unless a bunch of other seats come open. Imagine that I am one of California’s U.S. senators. If enough seats come open (~5 in the central district, 3-4 in the southern district, even 1 vacancy on the eastern district, maybe 3 on the northern district but for that district it’s academic), I would face a catch-22: either let Trump fill some of those vacancies or allow a severe shortage of judges that denies Americans filing the everyday kind of lawsuits that liberal and conservative judges would rule the same in (which could also make me look bad).

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I honestly don’t think there is any downside to not letting Trump fill district court judgeships in blue states. The blow back would be much worst letting him fill the seats. I am against blue slips 9Republican or Democrat president in office) but as long as they still exists, we can’t have Missouri, Kansas, Texas & so many red states denying Democrat presidents filling vacancies in their states while not responding in kind.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Frank's avatar

        But as a progressive, would you want everyday Americans not to have a chance to have their case heard by a judge because there is a judicial emergency? I would propose as the Democrats some uncontroversial 60-65 year old moderates who will secure bipartisan consensus upon nomination. If Trump isn’t willing to nominate them, then it is his fault.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        Nope, I’m good. Leave the seats vacant for 4 years or let Republicans end blue slips to fill them. This is the biggest difference between Democrats & Republicans when it comes to the judiciary. Republicans don’t care about who suffers short term as long as they get their long-term goals accomplished.

        If you have any doubts about that, take a look at the red state seats that were vacant in 2024 & let me know how they look now. You can start in Missouri, Kansas & Texas. Now let me know how many votes those Republican senators lost because they didn’t rush to let a Democrat president & Democrat majority in the senate fill those seats. Now those seats are filled with 40 (And in some cases 30) year old conservatives.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      I’ve had this conversation in the past about Vice President’s involvement in judicial vacancies in states they are from. We didn’t really get a chance to test it with Dick Cheney & Biden as VP’s because Wyoming & Delaware had little to no vacancies when they were VP.

      Harris didn’t seem to be involved at all with California vacancies which really surprised me. Vance seems to be deeply involved in Trump 2.0. Particularly with two junior senators in Ohio.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      More is getting out about the alleged affair. It lasted about two years and was known to the court staff. On one occasion, a clerk was so disturbed by the noise that she had to go home early. She’s also accused of lying to investigators about it, including Chief Judge Leigh Martin May and 11th. Circuit Chief Judge William Pryor.

      Also, she attended a rally for Fani Willis and falsely denied that. She later admitted the charges were true after sign-in sheets and security cameras undercut her denials.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        Judge Eleanor Ross was an Obama appointee but I remember she was part of the package deal (The worst one I can remember in history agreed to by a Democrat president) that gave an A+ 1th circuit court judge in return for a 60 year old second circuit court judge (Who subsequently retired under Trump) & four district court judges. Out of the four, I think two were Democrats (One Democrat was so bad, he didn’t even get confirmed because he was blocked by Democrats). I can’t remember was Ross the other Democrat or was she a Republican pick.

        Like

  40. Mitch's avatar

    Some info on Judge Matthew Byrne. He’s a member in good standing of the Federalist Society. Before becoming a judge, he was a partner with Jackson Lewis PC at its Cincinnati office and focused on employment law. Years ago, he worked for the Bush Adminisration in its Personell office.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I definitely don’t remember 2 of the 4 district court nominees being Democrats. I remember one being an outright Republican. I remember one being a Democrat. I remember a second (I think his last name was Boggs if I remember correctly) being a Democrat in name only but had voted against civil rights & LGBT rights while in the state government & eventually became the Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court after being appointed by the Republican governor as an associate justice initially. I definitely don’t remember the fourth being an outright democrat. Maybe an Independent at best.

      @Mitch

      Yes this could be an impeachable offense if it is as bad as it sounds. I don’t know if it will actually happen though. I would put my money on it more likely being she resigns if it is true.

      Like

  42. Mitch's avatar

    What if the judge in question doesn’t resign? Will Congressional Republicans will try to subpnoea the investigation? This could be impeachable. Not just the affair, but the perjury and misuse of government property. Possibly could be accused of abusing the staff who could overhear the moaning.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. Mike S.'s avatar

    Mays and Ross were Democrats, I’m not entirely sure about Cohen tbh. Boggs was withdrawn, he was the conservative pick from what I remember.

    I did read the Final Report from the committee. My guess is that Ross will not resign. She did show extremely poor judgment, but it seems like it could have been a lot worse…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I thought I remembered the Georgia deal being much worse. This is an article that was published in 2014 that states “The package deal means all six nominees — four of whom are GOP picks and two of whom are Democratic picks — can move forward.”

      *****https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-georgia-judicial-nominees_n_4549302*****

      Like

  44. raylodato's avatar

    Anybody know why the Current Vacancies list only notes 2 Kansas vacancies instead of 3? It’s not like the 3rd one is recent–each of them has a nominee. The Senate doesn’t list any floor votes for Kansas nominees last week either. Very strange.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. Mitch's avatar

    About Eleanor Ross again. If she resigns, there will be two vacancies in Northern Georgia. Chief Judge Tim Batten resigned on May 23.

    Bear in mind, politically Georgia is not Massachusetts. John Ossef won by 1% in a state that voted for Trump twice. Negotiating a package with two vacancies could make him look moderate and reasonable. I would expect that one of the two nominees would be a Democrat, either moderate or elderly, and the Republican in the package would likely be the same.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. Mitch's avatar

    The Washington Post has an article about possible Supreme Court nominees subtly auditioning for the position through strongly worded rulings. Hames Ho of the Fifth Curcuit, Andrew Oldham of the Fifth Circuit, and Lawrence Van Dyke of the Ninth Circuit are named. Van Dyke’s outspoken dissent in a transgender spa customer case got mentioned prominently in this article.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/05/30/with-flashy-opinions-judges-may-be-auditioning-supreme-court/

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment