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.
The Vetting Room 
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.
LikeLiked by 1 person
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.
LikeLiked by 1 person
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.
LikeLiked by 1 person
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.
LikeLike
There is an effort to get the Trump Administration to nominate Michael Berry to be a judge for the Northern District of Texas. Berry is a former Chief Counsel to Ted Cruz. A letter earlier this year called for the nominations of Berry and Kasdin Mitchell, who did get nominated.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/conservatives-push-ex-cruz-aide-to-be-tapped-for-federal-court
LikeLiked by 1 person
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.
LikeLiked by 1 person
First things first. We need Democrats to win a Fetterman proof majority this November. Then we need them not to be as stupid in Trumps 7th & 8th year as they were in GW Bush last 7th & 8th year & not confirm any circuit court nominees. Then we can worry about 2028 & reversing the current disastrous 5th (Along with other courts).
LikeLiked by 1 person