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.

1,280 Comments

  1. Mitch's avatar

    @Ethan

    The list for the Southern District of Texas is a good one, but another name you might want to watch is Magistrate Judge Christopher dos Santos. He is a former active duty Marine whose parents are both immigrants.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Mitch's avatar

    I have an update on the Western Texas vacancy. John Bash is running for state Attorney General, which makes it unlikely that he’d be interested in being a Federal judge. Unless the White House offers him a judgeship to clear the AG field for another candidate.

    Liked by 1 person

    • legalese-nightmare's avatar

      Per John Bash’s twitter: “Today, I’ve made the difficult decision to leave the race for Texas AG. On Friday, our family had a health scare that threw into sharp focus how I should prioritize my time right now, and that is not running for office.” While I don’t want to minimize a legitimate family medical issue, the cynic in me thinks he is getting the WDTX nomination.

      Like

  3. lilee2122's avatar

    Bidens first batch of appeals and district judicial nominees were nominated on April 19th 2021.. Waiting to see if this administration keeps up. I’m hoping their chaos and bad choices tie the senate judicial process all up in knots…

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Dequan's avatar

    Senator Dick Durbin has just announced he will retire at the end of his term. While I appreciate his decades of service, I am happy he will retire & pass the torch to the next generation. I’m looking forward to the new senator Illinois will elect.

    Like

    • Mitch's avatar

      @Dequan

      Any word on a successor? The impression I get is that Durbin would like for the next Senator to be another Democrat from downstate Illinois. But Illinois Democrats have become more Chicago dominated in recent years. Congresswoman Lauren Underwood is name to watch IMHO, she’s from downstate but seems acceptable to progressives.

      Word has it that GOP Congressman Darren LaHood may run. I think he’ll run ahead of party lines but it won’t be enough to win.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        My personal number one choice would be Governor Pritzker but I don’t think he put his name in the running. I would say after him, both Lauren Underwood & Raja Krishnamoorthi (Along with his $19 millions dollars in the bank) are the likeliest contenders. I don’t think down state versus Chicago area will play in the decision making. Sorry but the days of geographical representation are behind us. Democrats want somebody that can keep this seat safely blue for the next two or three decades. What part of the state they are from will be a distant priority.

        Like

  7. tsb1991's avatar

    As speculated, Durbin is retiring. I think the last holdout of undeclared Senate Democrats for next year. Obviously a LOT of things open up with this retirement, and the competition will likely be in the Democratic primary and not the general. Lauren Underwood starts off as the frontrunner should she run IMO.

    Beyond that, the top SJC spot is now up for grabs for Democrats next Congress. Could be Whitehouse or Klobuchar, and I’ve always felt Whitehouse has had his eyes on this role and is a natural fit for him.

    And most importantly, for the first time in 20 or so years the #2 spot in the leadership opens up. I know there was a lot of a discussion about Schumer stepping down as leader after the shutdown talks last month, but the way I viewed it was that he should only step aside if Durbin steps down with him, you can’t really replace one without the other (just as how it wouldn’t have made sense for Pelosi to step down as the top House Democrat after 2022 without Hoyer and Clyburn going too). The retirement obviously makes that decision a lot easier, where both could be replaced as leaders at the end of the Congress.

    The question is who replaces the two as leaders, there’s no real obvious successors. I think Schatz gets one of the two spots but no one really stands out after that. People have speculated Klobuchar for Democratic leader but my worry there is that being a party leader makes you a national/more polarizing figure and will cause you to become unpopular overnight. Klobuchar is pretty popular and it allows her to outperform the lean of Minnesota, but I don’t think she’d be able to do that as Democratic leader, and Minnesota’s not blue enough where you’re insulated from a red wave year like MA or MD. Heck, before becoming the Democratic Senate leader Schumer had astronomical levels of popularity in New York, winning re-election with 70% of the vote even in red wave years, and that quickly disappeared after 2016. Given what happened to Daschle in 2004 and Harry Reid’s near-loss in 2010, the leaders will probably be from safe blue states for now on.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. shawnee68's avatar

    Personally I like Klobuchar but she disappointed me in the Kavanaugh Confirmation hearings when he smarted off to her about drinking beers and she backed down.

    I think these “progressives” are selective when they say that want younger Senators but say nothing about Bernie Sanders who is the oldest in the democratic caucus.

    What we need are more democrats with some legal experience.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Ryan J's avatar

    I’m wondering what all your positions are on judges issuing nationwide injunctions. Democrat-appointed judges (and some Republican-appointed ones) are issuing lots of nationwide injunctions against Trump policies, but during Biden’s presidency, Republican-appointed judges issued nationwide injunctions against Biden policies.

    Some of the nationwide injunctions against Biden policies were so absurd that even SCOTUS dissolved the injunction, whereas judges need to have enough scope to issue injunctions to sufficiently safeguard against illegal executive orders.

    Here’s my idea:
    Any district judge should be able to issue an injunction extending across their district court (limiting relief to plaintiffs is wayyy too restrictive as many people don’t have the money to sue). Circuit courts should be able to issue an injunction extending across the circuit court boundary, and SCOTUS should be able to issue nationwide injunctions. To avoid having to file in every district court in the nation, the winning side should be allowed to appeal the case to seek a broader injunction.

    Alternatively, there should still be a way to seek a nationwide injunction without judge-shopping. My idea for that? There should be a “nationwide injunction HQ” (maybe in D.C.) where anyone who wants a nationwide injunction will specifically file for a nationwide injunction. Then, the “nationwide injunction HQ” staff (who would hopefully be impartial) will randomly choose one of the 94 district courts, weighted by the number of seats (i.e. the case would have a much higher chance of ending up in the Central District of California than the District of South Dakota). Thus, plaintiffs would not be able to judge-shop for sympathetic judges (though if the plaintiffs ended up with a judge hostile to the their position, they could still seek regional injunctions in more favorable courts)

    Liked by 1 person

    • lilee2122's avatar

      I would not consider changing anything at this time….The lawless executive branch over reach shooting out dozens of executive orders to tear our constitution apart is run by an actual felon himself. Judges from both parties are alarmed and doing their best to curb harm to all in our nation….This time will pass and then after assessing the harm to the 3 branches of government will be the time to repair ….

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        Even though Trump is in office, I still feel the same way about nationwide injunctions now as I did when Biden was in office. I don’t believe a single district court judge should be able to issue them. I think the ruling from the district court judge should only be for that district. Then an appeal can be made to the appeals court. I do believe appeals courts should have the authority to issue them with the SCOTUS as the final appeal of course. 

        Unfortunately judge shopping will happen absent a new law. I support a new law. Honestly I think they should reintroduce the Judges Act with the start date moved from 2025 to 2029 & include a judge shopping amendment provision that would also start in 2029. That would give it more of a chance of passing since it wouldn’t affect his administration & we do not know who will be president in 2029. For judge shopping I would make a simple amendment. My perfect amendment would be combining any district court that only has 1 or 2 district court judges into another district. That is less likely to pass so my other alternative would be simply have any case in any district with only 1 or 2 judges that either party request, be thrown into a random pool of judges with the adjacent district so it does not guarantee the sole judge in the district automatically hears the case. 

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ryan J's avatar

        I think just requiring the cases be randomly assigned within a district court is enough. The Northern District of Texas has 12 judges, but Amarillo has only 1 judge (Matthew Kacsmaryk). If all cases were randomly assigned within Texas’s Northern District, then any case would have about a 1 in 12 chance of going to Kacsmaryk (smaller due to senior judges)

        Liked by 1 person

  11. Mike S.'s avatar

    I agree – I would like to see the Judge’s Act finally passed, perhaps with a 2027 or 2029 effective date and staggering dates following that. I think it is also necessary to have serious conversations about splitting the 9th Circ., and adding a 12th Circ., as well as a few more circuit court seats (especially for the ever growing in population 11th Circ.). I hope a bipartisan bill is possible.

    What’s up with the lack of judicial nominations? Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy we aren’t seeing any yet… but we are going into May without any nominations. I am (pleasantly) surprised it is taking so long!

    On a side note, I recently read an interesting article on Senator John Thune. While his politics are not mine, it’s hard not to admire him. He is seemingly one of the last “reasonable” conservatives left in the Senate, and has been willing (at times) to throw up roadblocks (behind the scenes) at the MAGA agenda. According to the article, he was instrumental in allowing the remaining district court judges to get confirmed at the end of Biden’s term. While I was certainly not happy to see several appellate court seats remain unfilled, in retrospect, it was incredibly important to get those district court judgeships filled, especially in the D.C. district court. Thune also helped paved the way (belatedly) for two district court judges in his state. If it had to be anyone, I am glad it was Thune who got the job as majority leader, as he appears to be a man of his word.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      Thune is definitely reasonable compared to the majority of other Republican senators. I still will never agree anything good came out of the November “deal” to get all of the district court nominees confirmed. I still to this day say had Schumer worked even 4 days a week & held more than one vote on Monday’s, all circuit court nominees but Mangi would have been confirmed before the election. The “deal was unforgivable because it was only needed in the lame duck because of how lazy they were the rest of the year before the election.

      Like

      • Mike S.'s avatar

        Totally agree on that point. Waiting until the lameduck session to confirm all judges, when you had multiple opportunities to get appellate court judges (sans Mangi, and maybe Park?) and controversial district court judges confirmed when Vance and Rounds were absent, is certainly negligence on Schumer’s part. All things considered, with barely a majority, Dems did a solid job getting judges confirmed in the grand scheme of it all.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        Ryan Park would have been difficult depending on how serious Tillis “deal” was. I still say he would have been confirmed had the fishes been confirmed before the election. If you remember the first few days of the lame duck both Rubio & Vance were missing votes. Assuming Manchin & Sinema were the only senators to promise Tillis a no vote, Schumer could have confirmed Park the same day he confirmed Embry Kidd (Who would have already been confirmed in my scenario) before Republicans started forcing the extra votes & actually showing up for the votes in unison.

        Like

  12. Mitch's avatar

    I’m surprised no one is commenting on the two state judges being arrested by the FBI, Hannah Dugan of Milwaukee County and Joel Cano of Las Cruses. I hear both sides of the debate.

    It is unheard of for a judge to be arrested for anything but financial corruption that I’m aware of. Democrats are crying foul.

    But I hear others saying that it’s also unheard of for sitting judges to aid and abet fugitives from justice.

    The Milwaukee case reminds me of Shelley Joseph of Newton, MA in 2018. The charges against her were dropped by the Biden Administration. But last December, the state Commission on Judicial Conduct charged her with official misconduct, stronger than expected. So it’s possible that she’ll be thrown off the bench anyway.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dequan's avatar

      I don’t trust anything out of Kash Patel’s FBI so I’ll wait to see more evidence & facts come out on the arrested judges before I pass judgement. Judges are not above the law when they break the law, I just haven’t seen enough evidence yet to make a determination these two judges actually broke the law so I’ll reserve judgment.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        Dozen Candidates Contend for South Texas Federal Judgeships

        A dozen attorneys and judges have interviewed for open seats in the Houston and McAllen, Texas federal district courts, according to two people familiar with the matter.

        Nicholas Ganjei, the current US Attorney for the Southern District of Texas, was one of the people interviewed for a federal judgeship in Houston, those people said. A former chief counsel for Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ganjei was among those considered by the bipartisan Federal Judicial Evaluation Committee (FJEC), whose members are chosen by Cruz and fellow Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn.

        There are five seats for the Trump White House to fill in the Southern District of Texas, three of them in Houston and two in McAllen, a border court. Four of those vacancies pre-date President Donald Trump’s second term. The fifth vacancy will open in McAllen when US District Judge Ricardo Hinojosa takes senior status.

        Among the others who interviewed for a judgeship in Houston are Judge Jesse McClure of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, former Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Michelle Slaughter, and Angela Colmenero, the deputy chief of staff to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R), who’s previously served as interim state attorney general, the people said.

        Slaughter lost her bench on Texas’ highest criminal court last year to a Republican primary opponent backed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R). Slaughter and two other incumbents drew Paxton’s retaliation after the court ruled that the attorney general’s office can’t unilaterally prosecute voting-related crimes and can only act on an invitation from a local prosecuting office.

        Jennifer Freel, a former federal prosecutor and current Jackson Walker partner in Austin, and US Magistrate Judge Richard Bennett, who already sits in Houston, also interviewed for the seat, the sources said. Justice Ken Wise, who serves on the 14th Court of Appeals in Houston, was also interviewed, the people said.

        Bennett declined to comment. None of the other candidates for the judgeships immediately responded to comment requests.

        Five people also interviewed for a judgeship in McAllen, the people said. Alyssa Iglesias and Alejandra Andrade, who have worked as assistant US attorneys in the district, interviewed, as did executive assistant US attorney Arthur “Rob” Jones.

        Two US magistrate judges – Scott Hacker in McAllen and Ignacio Torteya III in Brownsville – were interviewed as well, the sources said.

        Candidates are also being considered for open judgeships in Austin and Waco, in the Western District of Texas.

        Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        It’s a long article from Bloomberg. They are naming people have interviewed for all of the Texas vacancies. There are many.

        It’s early in the process so Cornyn and Cruz have to sign off on them.

        Lots of prosecutors and some magistrate judges are applying.

        Cornyn is polling behind Paxton The Attorney General for Senate primary 2026.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Mitch's avatar

        @Dequan

        I’m surprised that former U.S. Attorney Ryan Patrick wasn’t mentioned. His father is prominent and he worked for Trump before.

        Judge Jesse McClure would be a history-making choice. If he’s appointed, the Court will have two black Republicans sitting on it.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Mitch's avatar

    There is a youtube video accusing Dustin Howell with being abusive and excessive contempt of court rulings. I don’t think it’ll be him.

    A number of former Cruz aides were in contention. I think that Cornyn will mostly defer to Cruz as he’s preoccupied with his 2026 primary.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Zack's avatar

    @Dequan, sadly I suspect the “deal” was made because Sinema and Manchin had decided by that point they were going to vote no on any more circuit court nominees so it was either district court judges or nothing.
    Still, it stings, we flipped a seat on the 6th Circuit only to have it negated by this flip.
    Just goes to show how much of a blow it was to not win a couple of more Senate races, Sinema/Manchin could have been told to go to hell.
    But alas, we didn’t so here with go with more horrible judges.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Lillie's avatar

    HOping against hope that Stranch Rescinds.

    Possibly she was holding out on the nominee to see who it was to see if they would be towards the middle? Maybe she was caught off guard by Trump winning and wasn’t sure how bad it would be? No clue. Maybe she’s thought about it more.

    Like

      • Zack's avatar

        2016 was one thing (and I had a bad feeling once Scalia died Democrats were in trouble) but anyone who thought Trump couldn’t win in 2024 was fooling themselves.
        Another article I saw (it’s now archived) made a good point.
        Cory Gardner in 2020 knew he was likely toast in the Senate yet he still voted for every judicial nominee that came his way and even if he hadn’t, Republicans had enough numbers in the Senate to where they could have ignored him.
        Democratic senators in red states instead of voting for Democratic judicial nominees would sometimes play hardball in hopes it would save them and that’s cost us over the years.
        If nothing else, as we saw in 2024 in places like OH/MT etc., it didn’t.
        And as I said before, as much as I have issues with Schumer, not even Murkowski and Collins can be compared to Manchin/Sinema obstruction wise.
        Finally, as much as Stranch upsets me, the 3rd Circuit vacancy in NJ will be where the ball was truly dropped.
        I hate what Mangi was subjected to but it was clear the votes weren’t there for him and his nomination should have been withdrawn.
        It wasn’t and there is the flip that truly shouldn’t have happened happening.

        Like

  20. Rick's avatar

    @ Zack

    While the Mangi nomination fiasco was bad, there was NO reason why Lipez and Campbell should have failed. They cleared the SJC on 8/1/24 and Rounds and Vance were out during the 3 weeks senate was in session in Sept. I don’t recall Sen Collins being against Lipez, though she did not introduce her at the nomination hearing.

    Ritz for the 6th Circuit was confirmed in Sept, and there was no valid reason why Lipez and Campbell couldn’t have been confirmed as well.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Zack's avatar

      @Rick, I agree but I sadly have to think that behind the scenes, some vulnerable senators asked Schumer to delay the vote until after the election lest they get hit with the they’re helping to confirm leftist judges (I’ve seen that happen before.)
      Stupid as it gets and it didn’t save any of them in the end sans Rosen.

      Like

  21. Mitch's avatar

    In a judicial side note, Senior Judge Harry Pregerson of the Central District of Califonia is suing Los Angeles for the loss of his home in one of the fires which swept the city. I’ve heard rumors that a lot of the fires were caused by homeless encampments.

    Like

  25. tsb1991's avatar

    Huge break in the Senate, Brian Kemp not running in Georgia. Still not a gimme of a course since it’s Georgia but Ossoff’s chances of winning got a lot better. Republicans don’t appear to be getting Sununu in New Hampshire so that race shouldn’t become competitive either. I’ve also heard people say that he should be on a ticket in 2028 if he wins, if not Warnock or Gallego. People like that make me want to tear my hair out because if I ran the DNC, I’d put a complete blockade on swing state Senate Democrats being on a presidential ticket and rip away the voting rights of anyone making that suggestion. Yes, if Ossoff wins next year and locks down that seat for 6 years, throw that seat away by putting him on a ticket and having to defend that seat again during a special election of a Democratic presidency (Republicans could also hold the governorship next year which would completely take those seats off the table). No amount of appeal to voters is worth risking a Senate seat and possibly even Senate control (even if you have a same-party governor making the appointment you open up a special election and having to defend that seat again and not sweat it out for 6 years), especially when Senate seats are at a premium for this party and Democrats have to run the table in swing state Senate races to even have a shot at control.

    I’ve also seen some speculation (Sean Trende) about why Trump hasn’t nominated judges yet. I’ve seen the posts here recently for Texas and Missouri (I’m surprised Cruz, Cornyn, Hawley, and Schmidt didn’t have a list roaring to go with the seats held open from Biden’s presidency), so I’m sure something is coming soon. I mean, April/May is typically when a president makes their first judicial nominations. There’s been some talk about how maybe Trump is looking for nominees who would even be more flat out loyal to him than his first-term appointments, as if the Federalist Society hacks the first time around weren’t psychotic enough. I thought the easy way out would be for Trump to just outsource all of nominations to the Federalist Society like in his first term.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Yeah, the pace on judges is surprising considering how quickly he’s done damage on everything else. In a sigh of relief, Trump’s DOJ is continuing to defend the abortion pill against the bogus case before Matthew Kacsmaryk. Of course, the reason he’s doing this is he wants to limit who has standing to challenge executive decisions — the DOJ argues the plaintiffs trying to ban the abortion pill lack standing.

      If Kacsmaryk refuses to dismiss the lawsuit despite Trump’s DOJ urging him to, Trump may avoid appointing Kacsmaryk type judges who are so against abortion that they are willing to defy Trump in order to further the banning of abortion (or other right-wing causes that Trump might not be fully on board with).

      Liked by 1 person

  28. Rick's avatar

    @ Dequan

    The real interesting thing will be the District Court seats in the blue states. Will the blue slips be preserved ?. There are open District seats in CA, CT, MA, MI, NY and let’s see if the Democratic senators in those states have a say in nominees.

    Like

  31. Mike's avatar

    Just sitting thinking about all those days and weeks senate Democrats wasted confirming the Deputy of Undersecretary of who gives a blank while nominees were waiting and vacancies were empty.

    The 235 was far more than I ever thought they’d confirm and I’m grateful for that but waiting so long to confirm the last district nominees let the GOP strong arm them into leaving 3 circuit court seats open.

    But then again, what were the Senate Dems supposed to do, work over the weekend!?

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Mitch's avatar

    Trump also nominated a judge for Washington, D.C. Superior Court. He is Edward O’Connell, the Deputy General Counsel of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. For years, he was an AUSA for the D.C. district. He’s 58 and doesn’t seem to be controversial.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Zack's avatar

        @Dequan
        Manchin and Sinema screwed the party but good in their final months in office.
        I gave them a lot of leeway because of all the great judges we DID get but what they did here with nominations was beyond the pale, especially since there was no reason to block them other then spite.
        Also, I have a feeling just having followed Democratic politics and judicial nominees over the years that there were vulnerable senators behind the scenes like Bob Casey and Jon Tester asking some votes to be held up lest they get attacked over them.
        My take on that is if you’re worried about a couple of circuit court judges costing you election, you’re already in trouble.
        In the end, the delay didn’t save them anyway and it cost us nominees that should have been confirmed.
        I would also note an interview Manchin gave a couple of months ago talked about many things, one of which was about confirming nominees and he more or less made it clear he and Sinema basically did a if you confirm people while Republicans are out, that’s it for anyone else.
        Goes to show the consequences of not winning races in Wisconsin/North Carolina etc.
        The more senate seats you win, the less you have to be at the mercy of people like Manchin/Sinema whom you really can’t punish.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Ethan's avatar

      Hi @Mitch, I haven’t found any articles either but here’s a few names I’m watching:

      For the two Jacksonville vacancies:

      • Joe Jacquot (born c. 1970): He currently works as a Shareholder at the law firm Gunster. He previously served as General Counsel to Governor DeSantis and also served as a Senate Judiciary Committee staff attorney back in 2005 during the confirmation hearings of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.
      • John MacIver (born c. 1974): He is currently a Judge on the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal and previously served as Deputy General Counsel to both Governor DeSantis and former Governor (now Senator) Rick Scott. He also used to work for the NRA Political Victory fund.
      • Jordan Pratt (born c. 1988): Like MacIver, he also serves as a Judge on the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal. He also previously served as Deputy Solicitor General of Florida, worked at the conservative First Liberty Institute, and held several positions during the first Trump administration (Deputy General Counsel of the Small Business Administration and Senior Counsel within the DOJ Office of Legal Policy). He also clerked for Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod on the 5th Circuit and Judge Harvey Schlesinger on the Middle District of Florida.

      For the two Tampa vacancies:

      • John Guard (born c. 1975): He currently serves as Chief Deputy Attorney General of Florida and previously clerked for Judge James Moody of the Middle District of Florida (who happens to be the father of Senator/ former Florida AG Ashley Moody).
      • Richard Martin (born c. 1975): He is currently a Judge on Florida’s 13th Judicial Circuit Court. He previously served as Chief of Staff to Ashley Moody while she was Attorney General.
      • Joseph Tompkins (born c. 1987): He is also currently a Judge on Florida’s 13th Judicial Circuit Court. He also worked as an AUSA for the Middle District of the Florida and attended the very conservative Ave Maria University for both undergrad and law school.

      Nobody I’d smile about.

      Liked by 1 person

  35. Zack's avatar

    Also, on the Missouri nominees, by and large while I’m not happy with them, at the end of the day, you could have had liberal progressive judges who could have written the best stuff around, and it would go to the 8th Circuit which is even more conservative then the 5th.
    Circuit court seats and SCOTUS are the prize more then district court seats are, though it still sucks we’ll have another place for right wing hacks to go to for crap lawsuits in the future.

    Liked by 2 people

    • shawnee68's avatar

      Most judges know how to avoid conflicts with the circuit courts.If you’re not too much of outlier then they will not be able to micromanage district court judges.

      Has anyone noticed that it is the district court judges even a few Trump appointees who are holding this administration’s feet to the fire?

      I believe that the district court’s are more important now than the appellate courts. You have to face them in person. They also have an inherent power to discipline attorney’s before them.

      Liked by 2 people

  37. Mitch's avatar

    @Ethan

    I need your expertise again. The North Carolina courts have been in the news lately. There are two vacancies in the Western District of North Carolina, both court houses based in Charlotte. Are there any names we should be watching?

    Liked by 1 person

  43. Ryan J's avatar

    [Repost from my comment on Anthony Myrlados’ blog]

    I’ve been trying to follow news about court rulings against Trump as it’s the little good news we had. And FYI, as someone on Instagram Threads reminded me, Trump is following most court orders – for example, ICE released Mohsen Mahdawi & Rumeysa Ozturk when federal judges ordered their releases. He reinstated National Park employees and brought back websites about “gender ideology” after federal judges ordered him to. He hasn’t deported anyone that courts ordered him not to deport BEFORE the deportation actually occurred.

    Every ruling that Trump’s administration has violated thus far has something in common: it deals with a deportation that has already happened AND has some kind of plausible deniability. The two orders (to my knowledge) that Trump outright violated were James Boasberg’s order to turn the plane around (admin claimed not to know about the order until the plane had landed) and the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case (Bukele willing to play the bad guy so Trump can claim he can’t do anything about it, even though a federal judge basically proved that Bukele will return Abrego Garcia if Trump asks).

    Liked by 1 person

  45. Zack's avatar

    Ugh, Trump is nominating Emil Bove, who was his lawyer at one point and has been carrying out some of his more vile orders to the seat Adeel Mangi was nominated to.
    Truly horrible nominee and one that truly shows where the Democrats dropped the ball.
    It was known Mangi didn’t have the votes and unlike a couple of other nominees, there was MORE then enough time here to pick a replacement.
    But Biden and others were so afraid of making Muslim voters angry they kept fighting a losing battle, and everyone who lives in the 3rd Circuit will be the loser.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      @Zack

      I just saw your post and looked it up. According the the New York Times, Trump is contemplating choosing Emil Bove for the Third Circuit, but he hasn’t made the decision yet.

      I don’t think Trump will nominate Bove. If he does, Bove face uncomfortable questions under oath.

      Incidentally, the conservative National Review is calling on Trump to not nominate him.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      And worst, Biden only nominated Mangi after Jeremy Feigenbaum was eliminated for being too young. Now Trump will nominate somebody born c. 1981 who is super conservative. All thanks to the thinking during the nomination process & the “deal”. Truly horrible all around.

      Like

  46. shawnee68's avatar

    Hindsight is 20/20. No one could have predicted what happened to Mangi.

    He had more experience than the other candidate .

    Clarence Thomas was selected for the Supreme Court at 43. No serious person who follows the court considers him to be a great legal thinker.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      @Mitch – The article is paywalled but thanks anyway.

      @Shawnee68 – I don’t think any of us are faulting Biden or Booker for pushing for Mangi. I gave him an A+ myself. I’m blaming Schumer & Durbin. All circuit court nominees should be confirmed the following week after clearing committee. If that means delaying recess, having more than one vote on a Monday or whatever then so be it. Those seats are too important. What happened with Mangi & most others is their nomination was left to linger. That gave the opposition time to smear them. If you look back, had they run with my timeline & Mangi didn’t have the votes, Biden would have had plenty of time to nominate Feigenbaum, Esther Salas or any number of other possibilities.

      Like

      • Zack's avatar

        @Dequan, even if they had done one week (which sans nominees in a lame duck session usually isn’t done), it was known there were issues with Mangi’s nomination, to where IMO when his nomination expired at the start of 2024, that should have been it.
        Instead, despite the fact numerous Democratic senators beyond Manchin/Sinema said they were a no go, he was renominated.
        That was malpractice and it will cost us a seat.

        Liked by 1 person

      • shawnee68's avatar

        I get what you are saying. But, Schumer and Durbin cannot force members of their caucus to remain in place for votes on judges.This is especially true in an election year.

        To confirm all nominees is impossible . To my knowledge it has never happened.

        It’s probably a better idea to plan for the future rather than to dwell a couple of unconfirmed judges.

        Having said that here’s a potential 3rd Circuit nominee.

        https://apple.news/Any_ZpzeCQ6CWDaMssQ0N5g

        Liked by 1 person

  48. lilee2122's avatar

    Emil Bove will not be confirmed if nominated to the 3rd circuit ……I almost guarantee it…Even the National Review speaks negatively of him …Bove has too much baggage to answer for without listing it all ..I’m sure another less troublesome henchman as one paper called him will be nominated…. He’s not a good person by any means….

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      I’m nowhere NEAR as confident as you that Emil Bove wouldn’t be confirmed. Trump has a LOT of leverage. To start, he can afford to lose 3 votes in the Republican caucus. 

      Who is the fourth senator that is going to vote no & risk the seat going unfilled by Trump depending on the midterm results outside of Murkowski, Collins & Curtis. Hell, if Bove gives Collins enough bs, she might end up voting for him too after he makes her feel “comfortable”? Am I supposed to believe Mitch is going to continue his independent streak now that we are on to judges? Is Cassidy going to vote no with him running for reelection? Kennedy tanked some Trump nominees in the first term, but they actually didn’t know the difference between a law book & a J Crew Magazine. I have a feeling as bad as Mr. Bove is, he will pass Kennedy’s law exam at his hearing. 

      Am I supposed to believe Tillis is gonna play nice since a few Democrats promised they wouldn’t vote to confirm Ryan Park? I’m not buying that one. Who is the fourth Republican senator that would vote no against him (Assuming the three I initially mentioned would all vote no int eh first place)? 

      Like

  49. lilee2122's avatar

    I’m pleasantly surprised at Judge Brian Murphy of Mass (Bidenominee) upholding ¹people’s rights under the constitution against the illegal Trump agenda on multiple occasions. That agenda which seeks to nullify all we hold dear that our country has stood for hundreds of years

    Liked by 2 people

  50. Dequan's avatar

    I have been going back & fourth with should I share this or not. Ultimately, today I decided to share because it wouldn’t have been possible without the blog here. Let me start off by saying I am not going to reveal the judge just yet, I will share more next month. About three weeks ago Harsh reached out to me regarding a law clerk for one of President Biden’s federal judges that wanted my contact information. They reached out to me & the judge has invited me to meet with them (I am intentionally using gender neutral ID) next month. I will write more after the meeting. I don’t want to reveal the judge until after so please don’t ask. All I will say is I will have to travel to them so it’s not any of the SDFL judges here where I live in Miami. I asked if I could bring my mother & @Ethan from the blog here & the judge was kind enough to say yes. Unfortunately, @Ethan has a scheduling conflict for that day so he won’t be able to make the trip. I am extremely excited to meet a judge that we have spoken about at length here on the blog & I look forward to sharing more about the meeting next month. 

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to legalese-nightmare Cancel reply