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.

1,922 Comments

  1. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    News from North Carolina

    Republican Phil Berger Jr., Associate Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court and son of recently ousted Phil Berger Sr., just announced he was not running for reelection as associate justice in 2028

    His statement does say he has other plans for 2028 which some speculate that he plans on running for either Chief Justice (replacing the retiring Paul Newby) or a statewide seat such as Attorney General

    Personally, I say good riddance. He wasn’t a judge; he was more of a rubber stamp for his daddy’s regressive and discriminative policies. And I hope he flops in whatever endeavor he’s cooking up in 2028

    Anyway, who do you think will run to replace him? 2028 is shaping up to be a crucial year for North Carolina Dems not just for the presidential and senate races but for the judicial races too. So I’m really hoping they run the best judicial candidates possible for that year to flip back the state supreme court.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      The North Carolina Supreme Court already has an A+ justice with Allison Riggs on it. I won’t get greeey & ask for a second but I hope whoever the replacement is will be somewhere as close to as great as she is. If James Wynn holds on until the next Democrat president, nobody other than Ryan Park or Justice Riggs should even be considered for that seat if Democrats have the majority in the US Senate, unless some phenomenal other possibility emerges between now & then.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Mike S.'s avatar

    Since we are in the “dog days of summer” in terms of judicial nominations, I thought maybe folks could offer their takes on state supreme courts?

    The Missouri Supreme Court just reinstated the original 2022 congressional districts, so that is huge. Kansas also has a very good court for a pretty red state. There is only one conservative Republican serving, and the rest I believe are liberal to moderate Democrats.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Solid rulings from some of the state supreme court’s recently. Isn’t it sad that the NY Court of Appeals (The only state who’s top court isn’t called the Supreme Court) would have definitely been more conservative than some red state’s courts had Governor Hochul not been forced into making good picks by her own party’s senate.

      On a side note, that may have been a wake up call for Hochul. On no less than 3 occasions in as many months I’ve told somebody Hochul has done something good. That would have been unheard of a couple years ago.

      Like

  4. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Y’all saw the new dystopian ruling from the 5th Circuit?

    Fifth Circuit: Originalism Means Jackson Is Allowed to Poison Residents’ Drinking Water | Balls and Strikes

    Can’t believe these judges have the gall to say that water is not a constitutional right

    And surprise surprise, all 10 judges who ruled in favor of that were appointed by Republican presidents. The usual suspects are there such as James Ho and Edith Jones, but I’m greatly disappointed by Priscilla Richman’s presence in the majority. Thought she became more moderate but times like these remind you of her right-wing roots

    Anyway, kudos to the 5 who dissented in this ruling, especially to Judge Haynes

    And I hope the 5th Circuit becomes more progressive in the years to come. I can see it happening, but it depends on the stubbornness of the Reagan appointees and the conscience of the non-crazy Bush appointees.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Mike S.'s avatar

    Thanks for sharing, good article.

    Kansas and Iowa Senate races, while still a long shot, are in reach due to Trump’s declining popularity and other factors (tariffs in Iowa and candidate quality in KS). I remain cautiously optimistic…

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Mike S.'s avatar

    I do not believe this batch is terribly controversial. In fact, in Alaska, the nominee is a compromise between the two senators.

    There are seven nominees remaining. I am curious how they handle… will there be a hearing after the election? Will Republicans try and squeeze in a hearing in October? Are more district court nominees pending?

    We need to win back the Senate now more than ever…

    Liked by 2 people

    • 39wimpyclues's avatar

      As much as I want for none of the new Trump judicial nominees to not get appointed, I doubt the GOP would let them go unvoted

      Hell, I’d wager that even when the Dems get a Senate majority (that I’m certain), they’d probably vote on them as fast as feasibly possible

      I’d even wager that maybe one of two far-right Bush/Reagan judges would take senior status by mid November in the hope that Republicans could ram in a 35-year-old far-right ideologue successor before January 2027.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Mike S.'s avatar

    The polls look very solid right now for Democrats. I think there is a real possibility they can take back the Senate, which for me is top priority. While there are a number of factors as to why that is the case, I believe this is primarily due to high gas prices (see war in Iran) as well as a terribly misguided tariff policy. Also, Trump going all in on Paxton was a terrible mistake and will likely result in Democrat control of the Senate.

    I agree that Republicans will do everything they can to ensure that every nominee is confirmed by the end of the year… if they lose the Senate. Luckily, there are just not that many seats to fill. We have been incredibly fortunate that so many circuit court judges have remained on the bench rather than announcing they are going senior.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mitch's avatar

    In a loosely related note, Judge Paul Diamond of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has requested a criminal referral against Philadelphia D.A. Larry Krasner. He stated that Krasner may have committed perjury and obstructed justice regarding the case of case of convicted murderer Dennis Johnson, who’s seeking to have his conviction overturned. Diamond also removed Krasner from the case.

    Members of Krasner’s staff stated that Krasner should send the case to the Pennsylvania AG’s office, due to conflicts of interest involving Krasner’s top aide, Matthew Stiegler. It’s claimed that Krasner and Stiegler forced members of the office to lie about their recommendations and mistakes they made in filings.

    Progressive groups wanted to see Krasner appointed as a Federal judge.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Mike S.'s avatar

    With timing one can only truly describe as “baffling”, three Obama district court nominees have announced they are taking senior status: Judge Staton (effective immediately, C.D.Cal), Judge Rossiter (TBD, D.Neb.), and Judge Cain (Oct. 1st, D.S.C.)

    In what one would hope is a sign of a process that will take time, Senator Fischer released the following statement:

    “Senators Fischer and Pete Ricketts will soon announce the application process for Nebraskans interested in filling Judge Rossiter’s vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska.”

    Like

    • Thomas's avatar

      I wouldn’t call it ‘baffling’, because Staton became eligible for senior status today and lost no time to leave. Cain will become eligible next Saturday and will stay for another four days at least. His notice was a little short-termed and fell together with the one of Rossiter, who is eligible since July 2026, while Staton has announced her decision months ago. Nothing nice two Obama Appointees are vacating their seats for Trump, but no wave of judges appointed by Obama rushing to the exit.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Mike S.'s avatar

    Maybe baffling was too strong a word lol. I hadn’t realized Staton announced previously she was going senior. Cain was a friend of Lindsey Graham, although for some reason I thought he was a Democrat. South Carolina senators are typically pretty reasonable with judges.

    Rossiter was a pretty noncontroversial Republican, hoping he is replaced with someone similar after the election. I guess both him and Cain announcing they were going senior so close to the election just caught me off guard.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Someone on here called the Rossiter vacancy in response to my observation about him “breaking tradition” in Nebraska. Even if Democrats retake the Senate, I would expect the Rossiter seat to be filled. As much as we would like for Democrats to hold every single seat open in 2027-28, you can’t blame Democrats for allowing trump to fill a seat on a notoriously understaffed court.

      Another judge in a similar situation is Dale Drozd of California’s Eastern District, like Rossiter he is one of just 18 Obama-appointed judges confirmed by a GOP-controlled Senate. I could foresee Drozd being the next Obama appointee to go senior under Trump, replacing one compromise nominee with another.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Mike S.'s avatar

        I wholeheartedly agree. If the Dems retake the Senate, I think they should continue to confirm a reasonable amount of district court judges, provided they are within the mainstream – that goes for both blue and red states. I would also like to see another Judges Act style bill that adds additional district court judges staggered over a ten year period, in addition to a few more circuit court judges (such as adding 3 more seats to the 11th Circ.)

        Liked by 2 people

  14. Mike S.'s avatar

    For context, when Republicans held the Senate in the last two years of the Obama administration, they allowed for the confirmation of two circuit court judges, 12 district court judges and held up a SCOTUS seat.

    Great poll out of Iowa today – starting to believe Dems can really take back the Senate. Now let’s all get to work and vote!

    Liked by 2 people

  15. Humanfault's avatar

    If/when Democrats regain the Senate in 2026 I’d be interested to see which conservative judges decide to retire/take senior status. I’m sure there’s a decent number out there who are hesitant for Trump to appoint Emil Bove types to replace them and would feel a bit more comfortable retiring knowing that any replacement would at least have to be moderate enough to reach the 50 vote threshold – so long as Democrats don’t block judicial confirmations altogether.

    Liked by 3 people

  16. Mike S.'s avatar

    Judge Leslie Southwick (5th Circ.) has just announced he is going senior… cutting it awfully close. That’s a bummer, he was a reasonable conservative on that court. Someone must be watching the polls very closely…. Here is to hoping he is the last one…

    Liked by 2 people

  17. Mike's avatar

    It took them awhile but looks like Republicans will clear 9 of the vacancies in Texas district courts before the end of the year.

    Cruz got the last laugh and then some with that circuit judge deal.

    Talarico will need to win reelection into his late 50s before he’d get a say in most of these replacements.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Mike S.'s avatar

    Honestly, I think they can still confirm his successor before the midterms. And he moved his chambers to TX a few years ago, but I believe this is still a Mississippi seat? Watching very closely. Republicans are very good with nominating and moving nominees in quick timeframes…

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Mike S.'s avatar

    I could absolutely see this going to Scott Stewart (unfortunately). I was not familiar at all with him, and when I looked him up… he looks straight out of central casting in terms of Trump 2.0 kooky far right-judicial nominees. Solicitor General of Miss., clerked for Thomas, super anti-abortion, and he is roughly 43 years old.

    Speaking of, for those at home not following too closely, we have a surprisingly up-for-grabs (maybe?) sleeper race in Miss. between Cindy Hyde-Smith and Scott Colom. Colom was nominated by Biden in 2022 to the N.D.Miss., and his nomination to the district court was blocked by none other than Hyde-Smith. Fast forward, and Colom has a plausible long shot to unseat her, depending upon how much worse the national environment gets for Trump.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Disappointed that Judge Southwick took senior status. Really thought he would last until the Dems retake the Senate

    With how close this announcement is to the midterms, my only hope is that they run out of time in confirming a nominee. Yes, they could probably bum rush it like what they did to Amy Coney Barrett or wait until the lame duck period but I’m holding out hope. Also, Cindy Hyde-Smith’s re-election bid is heating up so I hope she becomes too busy with campaigning to nominate a young far-right hack.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Mike S.'s avatar

    I went to check to see which nominees are scheduled for the hearing tomorrow, and oddly enough they still aren’t listed. But, I did find out an interesting tidbit. Sen. Blackburn is apparently blocking Samuel Adkisson’s nomination to serve as a district judge in TN. No idea what her beef is, but good for her. Adkisson has about 8 yrs of legal experience! I think he is about 33, which is insane. I guess Katie Lane was too old at 34!

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Mike S.'s avatar

    I follow a number of right-wing and MAGA folks on Twitter who are very involved in judicial nominations (Mike Fragoso from the National Review being one of them), and they have all pretty much confirmed it. I haven’t seen anything from Blackburn herself.

    So I guess this means there will be no October judiciary hearing while the Senate is out. Trump will need to announce more nominations in the next two weeks if he is going to hope to get them confirmed by end of year.

    Liked by 2 people

  24. Zack Jones's avatar

    Wanted to my add my two cents on a couple of things after a brief hiatus.

    1) When it comes to district court judges, keep in mind the blue slip rule is still in effect so when I see a judge from South Carolina etc. take senior status, I don’t take stock in the name of the president who appointed them when they take senior status as I would of someone from California etc.

    2) Leslie Southwick of the 5th Circuit is still a very conservative judge, it’s just that compared to many of the other crazies on there like Edith Jones, James Ho, Kyle Duncan, Jennifer Elrod etc., he looks moderate.
    I’m not surprised he’s taking senior status now, he doesn’t want his seat being flipped, which is why even the most “reasonable” conservatives are still hacks.

    3) Ruth Ginsburg’s passing made a bad court worse and I will always stand by my belief that it was a self inflicted wound.
    She could and should have retired between 2009-2014 after her second bout of cancer and her not doing so ensures her hubris is the only thing left of her legacy, everything else is gone.

    Liked by 3 people

  25. Mike S.'s avatar

    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/trump-to-tap-phelps-dunbar-partner-for-fifth-circuit-vacancy

    Damn, Republicans are good… just days later, they already have a MS nominee for the 5th Circ. Also, looks like two nominees for NC district court seats. Dems, we need to get our act together with getting nominees out quickly (with the next Dem administration).

    God willing, and the creek don’t rise, this will be the last November hearing for nominees (along with any others who haven’t had their hearing yet from the list that was announced in August)

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Mitch's avatar

    Trump nominated nominees for the two remaining vacancies in North Carolina.

    Philip Aubart: First Assistant U.S. Attorney, for the Middle District of North Carolina. He’s worked in that office for many years in the Violent Crimes section. He’s also a former member of the U.S. Army JAG’s corps.

    Brian Myers: currently a U.S. Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina after serving as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for that same district. He is also a former lawyer in the U.S. Marine Corps.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Humanfault's avatar

    It’s a shame Southwick’s replacement is likely going to be confirmed in the final hours before the new Congress. That being said, limiting Trump to only 14 Circuit Court and 45-60 District Court judges, not to mention no additional Supreme Court Justices, is still a great thing given how damaging his nominees have been to the Judiciary at large.

    Liked by 3 people

  29. Mitch's avatar

    @RyanJ

    I looked up John Tharp. He’s a Republican who was first nomianted by George W. Bush in 2008. The Democratic-controlled Senate claimed the Thurmond Rule and didn’t act. They had no problem with Tharp himself.

    Barack Obama agreed to nominate Tharp at the urging of Mark Kirk as part of a bipartisan package of nominees. In exchange, Kirk agreed to support several other Obama nominees.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Zack Jones's avatar

    Wanted to add a couple of more things.

    1) Yes, Republicans work faster then Democrats a lot of time on Circuit Court vacancies but you don’t have a nominee this fast unless it was a deal happening behind the scenes where Leslie Southwick basically made clear whom he wanted replacing him and Republicans went along with it since it will keep the seat in conservative hands.

    2) Seeing Terrence Boyle go on senior status reminds me of the fact he is one of the few examples of Democrats putting their foot down on unfit nominee to a higher court and never lifting the foot back up.

    From the time George Sr tried nominating him back to the 4th Circuit back in the early 90’s to when W tried to do the same, Democrats rightfully called out Boyle as a Jesse Helms hatchet man who had no business being elevated to the 4th Circuit and they held firm to that.

    Wish they had played hardball like that more often.

    Also, if we can keep Trump (or rather the Federalist Society) down to the 14 seats we have already, that’ll be a good deed of itself.

    I’ll still be angry over the three flips that shouldn’t have happened though, but again, it’s a consequence when you have idiots like Manchin and Sinema that you have to play nice with.

    Liked by 3 people

    • 39wimpyclues's avatar

      Oh yeah, I’m still not over the Circuit Court flips.

      Schumer should’ve not done it or at least give away the district court nominees.

      Instead, we got Emil Bove and Whitney Hermandorfer in place of Adeel Mangi and Karla Campbell. I blame the Islamophobic bigotry perpetuated by certain Democratic senators well when it came Mangi.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mitch's avatar

        What would have happened if the Biden Administration had chosen less controversial Circuit nominees? For example, what if he had nominated Judge Travis McDounogh for the Sixth Circuit, as speculated here before? He’s a Democrat and an Obama appointee but no one had any problem with him. Or if he had nominated Judges Julian Neals or Karen Williams for the Third Circuit? They were Biden nominees for District Court who were confirmed easily.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Zack Jones's avatar

        With Mangi, I don’t think it was Islamphobia that got him in the end, it was the fact groups he had done legal work for had ties to convicted cop killers and he thus got smeared as supporting that as a result.

        Either way, it was clear he wasn’t going to have the votes and his nomination should have been withdrawn in favor of someone else.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Republicans never ask this question. Democrats shouldn’t either. Lipez was not extremely liberal yet she was not confirmed either. I won’t blame Biden for the nominees not getting confirmed. I blame Schumer. I know we have had this discussion in the past but I will repeat myself…

      Schumer should have filed for cloture the following week after circuit court nominees were voted out of the SJC. Leaving Mangi out to hang for months allowed Republicans to paint him as an extremist. And yes I will bring up once again there was about a one month stretch where two Republicans were out (Vance campaigning & another home after eye surgery). Schumer should have spent less time confirming positions that are not lifetime & focused solely on the circuit court nominees that were pending. The two Republicans that were out would have cancelled out Manchin & Sinema, even without Harris tie breaking vote. It’s simple math. I know a lot of people want to blame Biden or other people but this was purely a MATH problem. Schumer was horrible at math & that cost us 4 circuit court judges. I’m still mad to this day about it!!!

      Like

  32. Dequan's avatar

    For those who were asking last week if there was any articles regarding Senator Blackburn withholding her blue slip for Samuel Adkinnson… I tried to post the two links but it doesn’t let me post them so I’ll just post the titles & you can look them up on line…

    1. Bloomberg Law – Blackburn Balks at Trump Judicial Pick in Rare GOP Pushback
    2. Politico – Trump is putting a generation of young judges on the bench — for life

    Like

  33. Zack Jones's avatar

    @Dequan, I saw that politico article and again, it’s not a new thing and making it seem like Trump created it irks me.
    I saw a thing on retired justice Anthony Kennedy the other day and it pointed out that under Gerald Ford, he was put on the 9th Circuit when he was only 39 years old, which is why he was on the radar after Bork/Doug Ginsburbs nominations feel through.
    Under Reagan, Edith Jones/Frank Easterbrook/J. Harvie Wilkinson III among others were put on Circuit Courts when they were all in their 30s and they’re still in active service today.
    This isn’t Trump, this is Leonard Leo and others simply giving Trump a list of candidates.
    As for Democrats, I get, you want to reward older jurists who have paid their dues a chance but at some point, if we want long last liberal/moderate influence on the courts, we have to go younger.
    Obama not doing that has cost us I’m afraid.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Humanfault's avatar

      I think it’s fair to say there should be a mix. What matters most is the quality of nominee first and foremost. Sometimes there are very reputable nominees who are very young and very talented such as Brad Garcia or Jeremy Feigenbaum. Many other times, as we’ve seen with many of Trump’s nominees, these “young and energetic” types end up only being nominated due to their youth and their partisan fervor – not because they’d actually be a good judge.

      Liked by 3 people

  34. Mike's avatar

    Politico: Judge’s active role at PR firm prompts ethics complaint from senators

    That’s a article title you don’t see everyday, I won’t post the article link to avoid ending up in moderation but check out the trouble Judge Jennifer Mascott has got herself in.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      @Mike

      Judge Mascott may not have broken any laws. The Federal courts’ code of conduct says a judge can participate in a closely held family business. Her husband had been the General Manager until he got terminal cancer. The PR firm was an LLC until it went out of business this summer.

      Still, no one can blame people for denouncing this arrangement. It looks bad. Judge Mascott made a big mistake. The best you can say for her is that she gave the appearance of impropriety.

      Liked by 1 person

  35. Mike S.'s avatar

    No news is good news… Question for the group:

    Given that the Senate Judiciary Committee rules require at least 28 days to elapse between the time the committee receives the nominee’s completed background questionnaire/information and when a confirmation hearing can be held, what is the absolute latest that Trump can nominate candidates before the end of this year and expect a hearing?

    Liked by 1 person

      • raylodato's avatar

        Anyone nominated as late as 11/9 probably wouldn’t get out of committee, since they’d have a hearing on 12/9, then they’d be held over on 12/17…and not get a vote, since they’re not going to be there 12/24.

        I know it’s not very good-government of me to say so, but I hope the Democrats go really slow on judicial confirmations if they get the majority, including district court nominees. A six-month shutdown at the start of the new Congress, until they get more moderate nominees, sounds about right, given how few vacancies there are.

        Liked by 1 person

  36. Joe's avatar

    Hey y’all. I haven’t been around as much since Republicans took over. But if my math is right, the SJC should have a committee meeting on 11/18 for the most recent nominees and those would be held over on 12/3 and voted out of committee on 12/10.

    The next opportunity for a SJC hearing would be 12/9 I would think. Even if the GOP broke norms a little bit and moved that up to 12/2, they wouldn’t be able to hold them over and vote them out until 12/17 without going through some extreme shenanigans. Unless they work the week after Christmas, I think they’ll likely run out of time for anyone else.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      @Dequan

      I got some basic bios.

      Joseph Flavey: Flavey’s father is a judge on the U.S. Court of Veterans’ Affairs, appointed by Trump. This Flavey is an AUSA, Chief of the Criminal Division. Before that, he was an associate at Jones Day. He formerly clerked for Thomas Griffith of the D.C. Circuit and then for Chief Justice John Roberts.

      Eric Hamilton: currently Deputy Assistant General for the Federal Programs Branch. Previously Nebraska state Solicitor General, formerly a lawyer in the White House Counsel Office.

      Liked by 1 person

  39. Mitch's avatar

    @Dequan

    I got some basic bios.

    Joseph Flavey: Flavey’s father is a judge on the U.S. Court of Veterans’ Affairs, appointed by Trump. This Flavey is an AUSA, Chief of the Criminal Division. Before that, he was an associate at Jones Day. He formerly clerked for Thomas Griffith of the D.C. Circuit and then for Chief Justice John Roberts.

    Eric Hamilton: currently Deputy Assistant General for the Federal Programs Branch. Previously Nebraska state Solicitor General, formerly a lawyer in the White House Counsel Office.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. Mike S.'s avatar

    So these two will round out the Nov. 18th hearing. I believe the last potential hearing could be in early December, which doesn’t afford much time. Hoping these are the last two nominations that we get, and that Dems can win back the Senate.

    One last thought, in addition to the staggering lack of diversity with these nominees, there is a very heavy influence with nominating young state solicitor generals. Definitely seems to be a reliable spring board for judicial nominees.

    Finally, in a bit of sad news, Judge Ada Brown (N.D.Tex.) seems to have had a nervous breakdown, and possibly abandoned her docket. After she disclosed confidential material, the 5th Circ. made the proceedings public. She has been suspended her from hearing cases pending further review and mental health evaluations.

    https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/texas-federal-judge-suspended-hearing-cases-over-mental-health-concerns-2026-10-19/

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Ada Brown is definitely one of the less bad Trump judges on the Northern District of Texas. I hope she recovers and returns to hearing cases, but if that isn’t an option then I hope this is dragged out long enough so that Talarico takes his seat and ensures that her successor is a compromise nominee rather than a far right hack.

      Voted today and now just have to wait 2 weeks for everyone who hasn’t yet to do the same.

      Liked by 1 person

  41. Ryan J's avatar

    Based on their rulings, do you feel that any Biden-appointed judge has been disappointing so far? I get that these judges are applying the law best they can, but from a layperson’s perspective some of these rulings just seem wrong. I’ll go first.

    1. Jennifer Rearden (SDNY) – one of the few Democrat appointees (and the only Biden appointee) to endorse Trump’s mandatory detention policy before the circuit court ruled on it

    2. Leon Schydlower (WDTX) – after the 5th circuit ruled in favor of mandatory detention, Schydlower consistently rejects habeas petitions, even though at least 6 of his colleagues (including 2 Republican appointees) regularly grant habeas petitions on due process grounds to circumvent the 5th circuit’s ruling.

    3. Edward Kiel (NJ) – ruled in favor of Kalshi in striking down New Jersey’s law regulating Kalshi. Also ruled that a sexual assault victim in the military has no legal recourse.

    That being said, I would probably still vote to confirm the latter two knowing what I know now. Additionally, so many judges appointed by Biden and other presidents, even ones we’ve complained about (e.g. Irma Ramirez, J. Michelle Childs) have stood up for the Constitution through all Trump’s attempts to undermine it.

    Like

    • Dequan's avatar

      Good question. It’s tough to answer after only a few years because it often takes at least five years to tap true jurisprudence. With that being said, rarely have I been disappointed in a Biden judges ruling. By disappointed, I am factoring what I initially thought of the judge when they were confirmed. For instance, the first two judges you mentioned are Jennifer Rearden (SDNY), who was initially nominated by Trump 1.0 & Leon Schydlower (WDTX), who had a blue slip turned in by Ted Cruz. So my expectations were not high to begin with. At least in the latter’s case it was a red state so he was acceptable. In the case of the former, she was completely unacceptable for a blue state.

      I can only think of a few times I can honestly remember seeing a Biden judges ruling & being disappointed in it. Judge Arianna Freeman comes to mind but I can’t remember the details of the case at the moment. I do agree with you on many judges we criticized exceeding expectations. Again, in most of the cases the criticism wasn’t about the judge themselves. Most of the time it was about were there many other better (And usually younger) or more progressive options, particularly if a Republican blue slip was not necessary for the seat. For example, I don’t think J. Michelle Childs is a bad pick for the district court of South Carolina. I think she is one of the worst Democrat picks for a circuit court seat post bleu slips when she was nominated for the DC Circuit. Same thing for Irma Ramirez.

      Liked by 1 person

      • 39wimpyclues's avatar

        Didn’t follow Irma Carillo Ramirez’s confirmation so how exactly is she one of the worst judicial picks?

        Is she too moderate or borderline Republican? Because from her votes on certain egregious 5th circuit rulings she seems like a regular liberal judge.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        Because she was a 59-year-old moderate, older than the judge she was replacing. Blue slips were no longer in play for circuit court seats. There was still a vacancy on the NDTX court she was nominated for by Obama, so she could have easily been a compromise pick for that court. And worst of all, at the time Texas had about nine vaccines on the four district courts. At the very least if Biden was gonna put a 59-year-old moderate on the 5th, he should have gotten a deal to fill all nine district court seats as a compromise. He only filled three, so she wasn’t even used as leverage good. 

        Liked by 1 person

  42. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    @Dequan

    Oh ok, I see

    Yeah when you put it that way, it doesn’t sound like a fair trade. If they really wanted to push it, they should’ve use the threat of a young, liberal judge in their 30s going on the 5th to make sure every single vacant district court seat in Texas was filled by Biden appointees

    Liked by 3 people

    • Mitch's avatar

      I have some biographical information.

      He clerked for Judge Dennis Shedd of the Fourth Circuit from 2012-13. Was an associate at McGuire Woods from 2013-17. He focused on Securities and Business law there. He was an the McNair law firm in Columbia, SC from 2017-18. Then joined Burr & Foreman in 2019, becoming a partner in 2021.

      He’s been Senior Counsel to the Governor since 2021.

      Liked by 1 person

  44. Mike S.'s avatar

    Remember the old days when you could enjoy the weekend without the horrors of a new Trump judicial nomination? This seems to confirm that the Judiciary Committee has been receiving the names of new nominees in advance of the public announcements. This nominee, in a break of past SC nominees, seems to be extremely conservative (RIP Lindsey Graham).

    Also, in other sad (but not surprising) news, Samuel Adkisson, the nominee in TN who crazy Marsha Blackburn was blocking, seems to have had his blue slip turned in and will proceed as planned.

    So you’re going to have a very busy Nov. and Dec. in the Senate with Republicans confirming these nominations, particularly if they lose the Senate. But what happens if Collins loses and Murkowski bolts, and both start voting against these far right noms? If Sherrod Brown wins and gets seated early and they can’t wheel in Mitch everyday, do they still have a functioning majority? Things could get very interesting, very quickly, if “things fall apart”…

    Liked by 1 person

      • 39wimpyclues's avatar

        It depends on how close the margin is

        All Democrats running for Senate would have to have winning margins of at least 2% if they don’t want to have a protracted bs court battle over the results

        God forbid someone like James Talarico wins by 10,000 votes in Texas because you best believe Texas Republicans would do everything in their power to either give those votes to Paxton or make sure that margin disappears

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Don’t count on Murkowski to do the right thing. I used to like her but in the past 2 years, Murkowski has cast the decisive vote on the Big Ugly Bill, let Dan Sullivan choose 2 far-right judges in Alaska, and endorsed Sullivan in his re-election bid against Peltola.

      I saw how Tillis fell in line at the eleventh hour on Hegseth & Blanche, and Cassidy on RFK Jr. Even though Murkowski & Collins voted against those horrid nominations, I bet they would’ve fallen in line if their votes were needed. If we have a 50-50 Senate next year, I expect that Murkowski will vote to confirm every Trump judge no matter how extreme.

      Liked by 1 person

  45. raylodato's avatar

    Let’s say, as I tend to think will happen, Democrats win a Fetterman-proof majority in the Senate in the next Congress (52 or more). It strikes me that there are 4 scenarios for the November-December period for all the nominees Trump has put up.

    1. In a reverse UNO of 2014, Democrats screw it up and Republicans hold marathon sessions to confirm all the present nominees.
    2. Democrats act like an actual opposition party and, like Republicans do, flex muscle from the minority party side. Republicans can only confirm a handful of judges.
    3. Republicans respond to the shellacking they take on 11/3 and concentrate on confirming only the CCA nominees.
    4. Like 2024, Republicans reach a deal with Democrats to confirm only district court nominees. (This is not a repeat of #2, where I didn’t specify which handful of judges would be confirmed. I had assumed they would be a mix).
    5. Democrats act totally unlike themselves and block all nominees, telling Trump he can renominate those he wants in January, but not all of them.

    What did I miss?

    Liked by 2 people

  47. shawnee68's avatar

    @ Rayodato- As Darth Vade said to Luke Skywalker “it is useless to resist .” Since most of vacancies are district judges and there are not that many , it won’t take long to confirm them.Also, they have plenty of votes to confirm them and that will be job 1.

    You get a new majority next session you can get a judgeship bill through that is overdue. For instance, the 9th Circuit needs to split.

    After the split we can increase the number of seats. That’s the only solution that I can think of. We all know that current Congress led by republicans will not pass any meaningful legislation. That’s not what they do and why they will lose next week.

    They don’t any solutions to any of the problems and actually couldn’t care less.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Ryan J's avatar

        Supporters of the 9th circuit split want to create a separate 12th circuit, which can be done in various ways.

        With the court’s current composition, I’m not really afraid of any potential split plan since 4 RRD panels (which collectively include M. Smith, Bennett, Miller, Bress, & Forrest) have recently ruled against Trump in major cases. Realistically, there are only 4-6 judges on the 9th who are ultra-right-wing, so at best for conservatives, one of the two courts created by the split would have a slight conservative majority that can be overcome by 1-2 defections from reasonable Republican-appointed judges.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply