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.

1,277 Comments

  1. Lillie's avatar

    Anyone else find the Habba drama pretty interesting? I wonder if because the standing order from DNJ was so sparce it was unanimous or what happened There’s a couple Bush judges I’m curious about or how that was handled internally.

    I’m really hoping it was near unanimous so that it lessens the collusion smears that the DOJ is doing.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Zack's avatar

    Republican voters care about the courts, Democratic ones have shown again and again that they don’t.
    Until that changes, you will not see Democratic senators caring about the courts the way Republicans do.
    And no, despite what some folks here think, a Senator AOC will not magically make a Joe Manchin/Sinema type vote for nominees they don’t want to.
    Also, it was made clear Mangi didn’t have the votes and yet Biden etc. choose to cling to his nomination for another full year when someone else could have been nominated instead.
    That failure isn’t on centrist Senators either.
    I know some folks here think more progressives will make this issue better but in 2000 and 2016 among other years, that wing of the party made clear they didn’t give a crap about the courts, laughable to see folks claim they are the ones fighting against Trump now when they didn’t care enough in 2016 or 2000 among other years to vote when it mattered.
    They enjoy protesting more then voting.
    Bottom line, it sucks what is going to happen tomorrow and this is one where the ball was dropped.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      @Zack

      I think that Democratic voters have become so accustomed to winning in the courts over the decades that they aren’t as focused on them. Recent rulings have only changed that a little.

      You’d think that Dobbs vs. Jackson would change that. If it had banned abortion nationwide, it would have made them much more focused on judges than Republicans. But it only handed the issue to the states. Most Democratic voters live in states where abortion rights weren’t affected.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Zack's avatar

    @Shawnee68,

    Collins has done this her whole political career, doing performative stuff because she knows people back home will fall for the I’m a moderate act.

    Too bad it works.

    As for Bove, it’s a consequence of Democrats losing Senate races in Wisconsin/North Carolina etc.

    If we had 53 Democratic Senators, Campbell/Lipez/Park would have been confirmed at the very least.

    Mangi still likely wouldn’t have.

    Not fair but it is what it is.

    Like I said, this is where you can say the ball was utterly dropped, this flip shouldn’t be happening.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      The worst part about Mangi is all sides could have still won. Biden could have replaced him with one of the 3 Democrat Murphy picks on the New Jersey Supreme Court. In return, I’m sure they could have worked out a back room deal with Murphy to put Mangi on the SCOT-NJ. 

      This is what I mean when I say Democrats need to be more strategic. GW Bush couldn’t get Janice Rogers on the 9th back when blue slips was still in effect so he put her on the DC Circuit. Thats the kind of long term thinking Democrats need to get better at. 

      Like

      • Zack's avatar

        @Dequan

        The issue was IMO Biden/others didn’t want to risk anti-Muslim backlash by pulling his nomination so they stuck with him.

        It gained them nothing in the end.

        As for Janice Rogers Brown, Democrats could have blocked her too but they caved on the Republicans threatening to do the nuclear option.

        I will say this on that, at least Harry Reid was smart enough to realize when it came to that, Republicans would do it the next time they had power so it was smart of Democrats to do it first, do bad they didn’t ditch blue slips for Circuit Court seats too.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        @Zack

        Yea sadly you are correct on all accounts here. Your first account you are right on cost us a critical  circuit court seat. Your second point I couldn’t have been more happy with the late great Harry Reid. Oh how I miss him & his leadership. 

        Like

  10. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Has there any been news regarding potential retirements/senior status taking in the 5th Circuit?

    While I’d like the Reagan and some older Bush appointed judges to just croak in a Dem presidency, we both they’d work until 100 before they’d let a liberal appoint their successor

    Like

  11. Mitch's avatar

    If there is a retirement on the Fifth Circuit, I’ll make a prediction. I expect that if the vacancy is in Texas, Trump’s first nominee will be Jonathan Mitchell. a former state Solicitor General who represented Trump in the case of Trump vs. Anderson last year.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Mike S.'s avatar

    I support a comprehensive judges bill to create a new 12th Circ. (adding a judge to both the 9th and 12th Circ.), provided that additional judges are created on the circuit and district court level. The creation of new judges should be staggered every two years (for the next ten years), with an effective date no earlier than 2027.

    However, the 9th Circuit should continue to encompass Washington and Oregon (in addition to CA, Hawaii and Guam). I also propose adding four (over time) circuit court judges to the 11th Circ., in addition to 1 more judge on both the 1st & 7th Circ.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dequan's avatar

      This should be the confirmation that breaks all deals. If Bove is confirmed, Democrats should go full throttle, no exceptions, next time they are in the majority. No blue slips, no red state consultation for any senator that votes for Bove’s confirmation, no deals. Any senator that opposes Bove I would still extend all current courtesies to once Democrats are back int eh majority (If they are still in the senate). 

      Like

  14. shawnee68's avatar

    I’m not talking about the Supreme Court. I’m over Clarence Thomas anyway.

    There’s room for one nutty guy on a court stacked with sane judges.

    He can’t do anything by himself and I can’t think of anyone else there who is doing Trumps’ bidding .

    Actually I would prefer to have Bove outside of the DOJ rather than running it.

    Like

    • Dequan's avatar

      That in itself is the difference is the way conservatives & progressives think. No conservative would rather (Fill in the blank of your most liberal, young circuit court judge) be in a lifetime seat, one step below the Supreme Court instead of working at the DOJ where the next Democrat president can fire them on day 1 of the new administration. Any replacement for Bove at the DOJ will be bad regardless. There is no replacement for Bove on the Third Circuit for the next few decades. This shouldn’t even be a close debate for progressives. I can assure you it isn’t for conservatives.

      Like

      • shawnee68's avatar

        You’re the expert on conservatives . In Florida they are all over the place and in charge.

        It’s not happening up here in California . We don’t have to rely on courts to get the laws and policies we need.

        You don’t know how long Bove will be there or what he will do . I remember when similar statements were made about Michael Chertoff.

        He was on 3rd Circuit for a little over one year. I’m not going ocd over one judicial nominee.

        Like

      • Dequan's avatar

        Ok you got me. I’m not God so I don’t know how long Bove will be on the Third. And thanks for pointing out Michael Chertoff but for every example like him, I can give you 20 or 30 samples of judges service at least two decades. So since neither you or me are God & don’t know how long Bove will serve, I think I will go with the 20 to 1 odds it will be for decades. In that case, my original point stands. 

        And I’m happy you live in California & feel more comfortable than those of us here in Florida. I wouldn’t rest on your laurels however. Those bad MAGA federal judges you don’t see to have a problem with giving up circuit court seats too will eventually catch up to you even living in a bright blue state. 

        Like

  15. Zack's avatar

    @Dequan, said it before and I’ll say it again, until progressives etc. show up to the ballot box when it matters, I’m going to take them claiming they care about the courts with a major grain of salt.
    They’ve shown again and again that they don’t

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Zack's avatar

    To me, the bigger failure will always be the fact it was clear Mangi was never going to have the votes and there was still almost a year to find a new nominee and it didn’t happen.
    Most likely because after Gaza, they didn’t want to risk angering Muslim voters more.
    Fat lot of good it did in the end.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Zack's avatar

    Emil Bove confirmed and thus Sam Alito’s old seat on the 3rd Circuit flips back to Republicans with a hack just as bad as him.
    What a stupid, self inflicted move by Democrats, Biden and Mangi himself who should have withdrawn at the end of the 2023-2024 Senate term when it was clear he wasn’t going to be confirmed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • shawnee68's avatar

      You guys said you didn’t like Delaney when he was nominated for the First Circuit vacancy.

      Mangi did not apply for for a circuit vacancy . The Biden admin saw an Oxford trained lawyer and took a chance on him.

      Many of you were not around when Clinton was president. He would not fight or take a chance on any judicial nominee.

      If you want to blame someone you look at Nevadas senators. No one knew that Trump would win Nevada.

      I can live with it for that reason alone.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Mike's avatar

    Emil J. Bove has been confirmed to lifetime a appointment.

    I don’t EVER want to hear democrats talk about “moderate” judges, I don’t EVER want hear their apologists talk about consensus picks here or anywhere else.

    Like

  20. Zack's avatar

    One other thing, Democratic voters including progressives have to show up.
    If you’re going to nominate liberal jurists that you will be attacked over, you darn well better have the folks who take these tough votes backs instead of leaving them out to dry.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Zack's avatar

    So the 3rd Circuit will now be 8-6 conservative for the next 20-30 years at least, in part because Clinton and Obama judges sans Greenway took senior status/retired under Trump or when their replacements couldn’t be confirmed, nice going there.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Zack's avatar

    The NV Senators were covering for others, including Bob Casey, not that it helped anyone.
    But as with Michael Delaney, it was clear the votes weren’t there and I still don’t get why they insisted on fighting a battle they couldn’t win.
    P.S. This is why seats matter, Mangi and others might have gotten confirmed if we had 53 senators but Manchin/Sinema, wasn’t gonna happen.

    Liked by 2 people

  25. Mike's avatar

    Trumps telling Grassley to end blue slips.

    I remember having issues posting urls here but it’s a politico article from 7 hours ago.

    That’s impressive, they haven’t even confirmed 10% of the open red seats yet and they want to end it already.

    Liked by 1 person

    • shawnee68's avatar

      The GOP are masters of branding and blaming. They are so good even people on here signed on to their campaigns.

      When they went after Delaney and Bjelgrenkren I was surprised that so many eagerly joined in on their collective nonsense.

      Unfortunately it works for the GOP at times including on this blog.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        For the record, I wasn’t thrilled about Charlene Bjelgrenkren‘s nomination even before her hearing. Same could be said about Sarah Netburn. So not in every case the GOP is wrong. I’m more concerned about Democrats falling for it when it comes to highly qualified nominees like Mangi, Campbell & Park. 

        Like

  27. Zack's avatar

    @Mitch,
    None, likely because they know there is no point, Tung is going to be confirmed and replace a George W hack in Sandra Ikuta, who whined more then once about how liberal the 9th Circuit was.
    Can you imagine the blowback that would cause if a liberal judge said that?

    Liked by 2 people

  28. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    Ok now that Bove’s been confirmed, I want Democrats to use him in their attack ads.

    And when Democrats get the Senate and Presidency back, they need to appoint younger leftist judges in the vein of Nancy Abudu or Rachel Bloomekatz. No more of that moderate, consensus picks. Gotta start taking a page of the conservative judicial playbook.

    Liked by 2 people

  29. raylodato's avatar

    I have no inside knowledge of this, but it’s been mentioned here before and I think it’s correct: I wouldn’t be surprised if the Biden White House held onto Mangi so as not to lose support among Muslims in the election if they pulled him. I would guess that was because they were trying to hold onto Michigan in the EC.

    Now, would Muslims have abandoned the Democrats just on the basis of Mangi’s nomination being pulled? I haven’t seen any data to suggest that was true, but I’m sure the campaign was counting every last vote. Better safe than sorry, especially because if Harris had won, she could have renominated him.

    Now, do I wish they had nominated someone else and filled the seat? For sure.

    Do I still think Schumer’s “deal” was about the dumbest thing he could have done (saying a lot, I know)? Yup. And that’s taking into account that I felt he should have gotten *at least* Campbell and Lipez in his “deal.”

    All of which is to say I can see the calculus on keeping the Mangi nomination active, although I disagree with it.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Joe's avatar

    I think the biggest issue is that Sinema and Manchin more or less got wooed/bribed by Republicans and didn’t want to vote for progressive nominees. And once Republicans started showing up with perfect attendance it became impossible.

    The real lesson from all of this is that Democrats needs to do exactly what Republicans just did with Bove and not let anyone linger. All nominees should be confirmed within 2-3 weeks after they are voted out of committee. Had Mangi simply been pushed through in February 2024, not a single person outside of this board or the Federalist society would have remembered his vote come November. By letting his nomination hang around, the vote became that much more difficult and then impossible.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. beyondnonjd's avatar

    Great to see this community is still around! Tillis’ floor speech earlier this afternoon highlighted blue slips and some of the discussions from 2024 around the CCA4 failed nomination and the “deal(s)” Tillis made. Y’all may want to check it out! Some other helpful insights/framing.

    I use the nomination, confirmation, and retirement/senior status/death of AIII judges as one of the themes for introducing the U.S. legal system for LL.M. students in the U.S. and LL.B. students abroad, so this stuff interests me a lot. And glad it’s also important to so many of you!

    Will be curious to see how this plays out with Tillis/Trump and all the vacancies across North Carolina. Especially with the possibility (likelihood?) of a flip for the 120th Congress. Unless part of the plan would be to use Cooper’s reluctance (if he wins) to get rid of district court blue slips. Who knows at this point!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Joe's avatar

      I see the Republicans sticking to blue slips for now. But if they maintain control of the senate (which I view as likely) then I would not be surprised to see Trump begin to push it heavily in 2027.

      I felt that Democrats should have done the same in 2023 and advocated for it here at the time. Of course, Manchin, Sinema, and others probably wouldn’t have been for it. But it would have been nice to have filled all of those red state seats (as well as the four circuit court seats).

      Liked by 1 person

  32. aangren's avatar

    Good to see everyone here is still doing well. Oh take me back to the good ol days when biden announced CJA and KBJ for circuit court nominations, take me back to the good ol days of jennifer sung and abudu confirmation hearings, i watched everything for four years but have no interest in the fascist judges from trump now. One thing that really pisses me off and i insist is still criminal and malpractice from schumer was that pathetic lousy deal allowing trump to get 2 circuit seats, its inexcusable.

    Also shows the complete cowardice of the democratic senators to follow the president agenda. i genuinely can not believe Jeanine pirror a certified lunatic and alcoholic drunk, is going to be approved by the judiciary committee and confirmed. The woman has openly called the opposition ”demonrats’ and called them every slur and book on live tv yet for this republicans they dont bat an eye. What pisses me off about this is the same folks including democratic senators were apoplectic because of neera tanden few racy tweets nothing close to this, yet she couldn’t be supported for a lesser positon not even a top us attorney spot. Democrats look for consensus republican look or a bull in a china shop to openly diresecpt and denigrate their oppositon, thats a virtue for them to get nominated for positions.

    Next democratic president should put people like lisa rubin, frequent msnbc guests and liberal guests in all positions of power let the GOP head turn. Imagine kash patel as the head of the fbi? its sickening the man was confirmed, but atleast now we know what is the bar if democrats have any common sense. Biden admin was a failure highlighted by merric garland fecklessness , he was scared of picking sally yates because gop might get too mad, trump? he shoves his partisan hack pam bondy and she is confirmed and no fuss. why always one rule for the gop and another for democrats.

    Liked by 2 people

  33. shawnee68's avatar

    Long time no hear. It just works that way there are things the GOP does and can get away with and Democrats can’t .

    Does anyone believe that if Barack Obama was convicted of sexual assault he could be elected president? Of course not!

    That’s the double standard we’ve been living with for many years.

    Liked by 1 person

  36. IrvineOnlooker's avatar

    I would group the R appointees on the 5th like this

    Moderate

    • Southwick
    • Haynes

    Generally conservative, but more flexible on certain issues (ex. executive agency, qualified immunity)

    • Willett
    • Richman
    • Elrod

    Strong conservative

    • Engelhardt
    • Wilson
    • Smith

    Partisan hacks/ideologues

    • Duncan
    • Jones
    • Oldham
    • Ho

    Liked by 4 people

  37. IrvineOnlooker's avatar

    Re: Tung nomination

    It sucks Trump got another young nominee, but Ikuta was never going senior under a Dem president, and its pretty hard to get a nominee even further right than her. I suspect Tung will be very similar if not identical to how Bumatay is on the court. It does shift the balance a bit to Republicans with Ikuta staying on as a senior judge since they seem to still have pretty heavy caseloads still, but luckily many of the Clinton appointees that went senior under Biden are still active judges

    Liked by 2 people

    • Zack's avatar

      @IrvineOnlooker,
      Indeed, Ikuta is a strong conservative who at one point in time was well known for complaining about how liberal the 9th was (imagine if a liberal jurist did that with the 5th or SCOTUS etc.)
      There was no way on earth, she or Diane Sykes, who is also a right wing hack were going to take retirement under a Democratic president.
      It does suck we won’t get to flip those seats but it is what is.
      Us losing the seat on the 3rd Circuit irks me more.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Yes, notably, despite the 9th circuit still being 16D, 13R as it has been since 2019, the senior judges have become more liberal. Notably, liberals have had a string of recent wins in the 9th against the Trump administration just this year:

      Feb 19 – unanimous 2R/1D panel (Canby, M. Smith, Forrest) blocks Trump’s ending of birthright citizenship on the shadow docket

      March 27 – Panel votes 2-1 on party lines (Silverman & de Alba in the majority; Bade dissenting) to temporarily block Trump from halting refugee admissions (SCOTUS reversed)

      April 18 – Unanimous panel (Tashima, Owens, Desai) keep temporarily block on banning transgender people from serving in the military (SCOTUS reversed)

      May 14 & 30 – Panel votes 2-1 on party lines (W. Fletcher & Koh in the majority; Callahan dissenting) to block Trump from cutting legal aid for migrants

      July 23 – Panel votes 2-1 on party lines to block Trump’s ending of birthright citizenship NATIONWIDE (Gould & Hawkins in the majority; Bumatay dissenting)

      August 1 – my favorite of the rulings – Unanimous panel (Gould, Berzon, Sung) affirms district court ruling that ICE cannot detain people based on their race, language, location, or job

      Counting up the judges who have ruled against Trump, we have 3 Biden judges (Koh, Sung, Desai), 1 Trump judge (Forrest), 1 Obama judge (Owens), 1 GW Bush judge (M. Smith), 6 Clinton judges (Gould, Hawkins, Tashima, Silverman, W. Fletcher, Berzon), and 1 Carter judge (Canby).

      At least 13 judges (7 circuit judges and 6 senior judges) have ruled against Trump in his 2nd term. I would consider 2 of them (M. Smith & Forrest) to be moderate conservatives and 3 of the Dem appointees (Gould, Silverman, Owens) to be moderates.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      I expect that the 9th circuit will stay around 16-13 liberal/conservative for a while. Aside from maybe Callahan, I don’t see any other judges voluntarily stepping aside. Even if the GOP does somehow fill 2 Dem-held seats on the 9th, they could try to en banc every ruling handed down by liberal senior judges, but (1) they would have to convince Miller and other holdouts to do so and (2) the court could still draw a liberal en banc panel.

      Also of note: Because not every judge hears every case, the types of cases a judge gets assigned to can affect how liberal or conservative they are perceived. Despite the 6+ major losses Trump’s had on the 9th circuit this term, he’s had at least 2 major wins:

      June 17 – unanimous 2R/1D panel (Bennett, Miller, Sung) ruled that he could keep control of the California National Guard, reversing the district court

      August 1 – unanimous 2R/1D panel (Owens, Bade, Bress) ruled that he could prevent certain federal employees from collective bargaining

      Liked by 1 person

  38. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    In state supreme court news:

    Judge Susan Crawford has been formally sworn in to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. So glad the 4-3 liberal is maintained for the next few years.

    All the justices of the SCOWIS were present at her investiture ceremony with the noticeable absent of Rebecca Bradley who is up for reelection next year. Something tells me she won’t be getting along with Crawford especially after her tirade against her went viral a few months ago. Can’t to wait to see her be defeated by Judge Chris Taylor and expand the 4-3 liberal majority to a 5-2 supermajority.

    In other news, Justice Brian Hagedorn said in an interview two days after the ceremony that he’d most likely run for re-election in 2029. Honestly, wouldn’t mind Dems not running an opponent against him considering he actually has a spine and conscience compared to Rebecca Bradley and Annette Ziegler.

    And that’s it for Wisconsin. Hopefully, North Carolina would follow its path in the next few years God be willing.

    Liked by 2 people

  41. Zack's avatar

    The 9th Circuit, which was liberal at one point is a sad reminder of how elections have consequences.
    Between Trump and George W, there are 17 right wing judges (along with some ones on senior status) who will gladly rubberstamp anything Trump or Republicans do.
    Some folks who live in CA and other places who pushed the both sides are the same stuff online thinking they’d be safe in their blue states are going to have a brutal wake up call.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      13 right wing judges, not 17. Out of the 13, at least 2 (M. Smith & Forrest) are not rubberstamps for Trump. Senior judges are hard to quantify since some hear more cases than others, though I think the majority of senior judges are Dem-appointed.

      Still, you and Shawnee are correct that going to the 9th circuit is risky for liberals. Although Trump has lost 6 of 8 major cases that the 9th has heard, a lot of it was luck — the 9th circuit happened to generate panels with liberals, moderates, or conservatives who aren’t complete hacks.

      Liked by 1 person

  42. Mitch's avatar

    On the Ninth Circuit, Consuela Callahan and Milan Smith are considered moderate. Among Trump appointees, Mark Bennett is considered moderate, even tilting liberal on a few issues. Danielle Forrest is a compromise nominee. Bridgette Bade also is to a lesser extent.

    Liked by 2 people

  43. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    @ryanj

    So all in all, about 5 far-right judges in the 9th. Once again, not bad compared to the 5th but it honestly should be zero. Also, Bumatay’s ideology puzzles me because how can you be a gay man with a husband and have far-right leanings? That’s just stupid

    Liked by 3 people

  44. Mike S.'s avatar

    The NYTimes had an article on Judge James Ho that was an interesting read. Let’s hope he never makes it to SCOTUS, this guy is cuckoo for cocoa puffs.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/09/us/judge-ho-trump-border.html

    The one good thing so far into the 2nd Trump term is that judges are just not taking senior status. I think they are concerned by Trump’s flagrant disregard for the judiciary. I really hope we get a judges bill eventually, but it worked out well that Biden vetoed the JUDGES Act.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Scott Royce's avatar

      Sadly, Ho is one of the federal judges most often mentioned in rightwing circles as a hot replacement prospect for Alito or Thomas–not only due to his depressingly (bad) opinions but because the GOP would love to claim credit for putting the first Asian American on the Supreme Court, thus making it more appealing to such voters. (The Dems should have jumped on this–with Lucy Koh, perhaps–when they had the chance.) Ho, to his credit, used to defend the traditional view of birthright citizenship. But I gather that of late he’s been hedging on the matter–no doubt auditioning for the big guy in the White House.

      Liked by 2 people

      • 39wimpyclues's avatar

        Yeah, Ho is a damn disgrace and should’ve never been confirmed in the first place. If only Judge Carolyn Dineen King hadn’t taken senior status or taken it during Biden’s presidency.

        I do think both Alito and Thomas are the ones who want to stay on the SCOTUS for life, so I hope that backfires for the both of them just like with Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

        Liked by 2 people

  45. Zack's avatar

    Judge James Ho wouldn’t have been on the 5th Circuit if Patrick Leahy hadn’t clung to the blue slip rule for Circuit court nominees which Republicans had shown under W they didn’t care about.
    He gifted McConnell over a half dozen Circuit court seats due to that.

    Liked by 3 people

  47. Mitch's avatar

    Three new judges have been nominated for Alabama district courts. They are:

    Edmund LaCour- Solicitor General of Alabama. He was nominated in 2020, but blocked by Doug Jones.

    Bill Lewis- recently appointed Associate Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, former judge on the Alabama Court of Appeals.

    Harold Mooty- a partner at the prominent law firm of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings.

    Liked by 1 person

  48. Mitch's avatar

    Whoops, I almost missed that Trump has nominated two Federal judicial nominees for Mississippi:

    James Maxwell- Associate Justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court.

    Robert Chamberland- also an Associate Justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court.

    Liked by 1 person

  49. Ethan's avatar

    I’ve only heard of LaCour, who Doug Jones blocked last time he was nominated.

    Here’s the approximate birth years for all of them:

    • LaCour: 1985
    • Lewis: 1978
    • Mooty: 1983
    • Maxwell: 1975
    • Chamberlin: 1965

    Lewis is a Black Republican.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to Ethan Cancel reply