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.

1,225 Comments

      • Ryan J's avatar

        If next year is good year for Democrats (and Trump fails in his attempts to rig the midterm elections), I think Ohio, NC, & Maine are flippable.

        Then we just need a wildcard seat, which could include Alaska (Mary Peltola v. Dan Sullivan) or Nebraska (Dan Osborn). My friend from Alaska posted a poll today showing Peltola 2 points ahead of Sullivan. I don’t put too much stock into polls but it shows that it’s not impossible for Peltola to flip Alaska. There is also some very small chance that if Paxton beats Cornyn in Texas, a Democrat could win the general election (though small enough that I am NOT rooting for Paxton to win the primary).

        Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Most people aren’t politically aware enough to see through Susan Collins’s disguise as a reverse-Joe Manchin. For years, I genuinely believed that Susan Collins is a moderate, even after she voted to confirm Kavanaugh and acquit Trump.

      If you’re the strategist for Susan Collins’s opponent, you don’t really have much to pin her as a Trump loyalist (only votes from 2021-2026 count since she got re-elected after voting to confirm Kavanaugh & acquit Trump). Meanwhile, if you’re Susan Collins’s campaign, and you want ads/postcards that specifically target Democratic voters, you can point to Susan Collins’s votes

      -in favor of convicting Trump after the Jan. 6 riots
      -in favor of confirming Ketanji Brown Jackson
      -against confirming Pete Hegseth
      -against voting the Big Ugly Bill

      I’ve had my suspicions for years, but the tipping point where I realized that every Senate Republican is in a coordinated effort to be Trump’s lackeys has nothing to do with Collins herself. This tipping point was MURKOWSKI voting in favor of the Big Ugly Bill, which Collins voted against. I saw all the votes on Democratic amendments. Collins & Murkowski supported some of them, Rand Paul & Thom Tillis supported some, and even Josh Hawley supported a couple of them. But despite all these crossover votes, ZERO of the Democratic amendments passed. You cannot have that many 49-51 votes and lineups without a coordinated effort to make sure that every Democratic amendment is doomed to fail.

      But this probably won’t matter in 2026, since the GOP has 53 seats they can let Collins keep voting against her party while privately promising Trump that Collins will support his agenda if her vote will determine the outcome.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Ryan J's avatar

    Most former federal judges rarely make the news or comment on political matters, but today, 31 former federal judges called on the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s tariffs. These former judges have a wide range of ideological and geographical backgrounds, and most have never publicly spoken out against the Trump administration. The 31 judges are:

    John Winslow Bissell (NJ)
    Michael Burrage (N.D. Oklahoma)
    Robert J. Cindrich (WDPA)
    Andre M. Davis (4th Cir.)
    William F. Downes (Wyoming)
    Allyson K. Duncan (4th Cir.)
    Gary Allen Feess (C.D. Cal.)
    Jeremy Fogel (N.D. Cal.)
    William Royal Furgeson Jr. (WDTX)
    Paul W. Grimm (Maryland)
    Andrew J. Guilford (C.D. Cal.)
    Thelton Henderson (N.D. Cal.)
    Robert Harlan Henry (10th Cir.)
    John E. Jones III (MDPA)
    John S. Martin Jr. (SDNY)
    A. Howard Matz (C.D. Cal.)
    Richard B. McQuade Jr. (N.D. Ohio)
    Paul R. Michel (Fed. Cir.)
    Liam O’Grady (EDVA)
    Kathleen M. O’Malley (Fed. Cir.)
    Layn R. Phillips (W.D. Oklahoma)
    Philip M. Pro (Nevada)
    Shira A. Schendlin (SDNY)
    Ursula Ungaro (SDFL)
    Vaughn Walker (N.D. Cal.)
    T. John Ward (EDTX)
    Alexander Williams Jr. (Maryland)
    Diane Wood (7th Cir.)
    Thomas Vanaskie (3rd Cir.)
    Lee Yeakel (WDTX)

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Mike S.'s avatar

    Also, didn’t see it mentioned here, but John Doe also announced that 8th Circ. Judge Duane Benton (GWB appointee) will take senior status upon confirmation of a successor. I hope the rest of the Republican judges on the various circuit courts can hold on until the end of Trump’s term.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. 39wimpyclues's avatar

    @Dequan

    Oh it’s definitely gonna be Mrs. Erin Hawley. She’s young (45/46), with proper conservative credentials, helped overturned Roe v Wade, and has a senator for a husband.

    Honestly, it sucks that even if Josh Hawley is voted out in the coming years, his wife would still do immense damage on the 8th Circuit. I hope this will be the only vacancy on that court but I ain’t holding my breath.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. beyondnonjd's avatar

    The second Trump 2.0 AIII nominee to get > 1 D/I vote:

    7:02 p.m. By a vote of 58-40, the Senate confirmed the nomination of Bill Lewis to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Alabama.

    • Senators Cassidy and Fetterman did not vote.
    • Democratic Senator voting aye: Durbin, Hassan, Kaine, King (I), Peters, and Schiff.

    Will be curious if we get another story focused on pressure on D Senators from Demand Justice and other groups for those voting yes. FWIW, the NC batch was voted out of the SJC 17-5 (Courtwright Rodriguez); 15-7 (Freeman); 14-8 (Orso); and 12-10 (Bragdon), so when Senate Rs tee up those votes I’m guessing we’ll see another story as people see more D Senators voting yes.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Mike S.'s avatar

    I really don’t have an issue with some Democrat senators voting to confirm mainstream conservative judges – after all, elections have consequences. I don’t think there are going to be a lot of them nominated this time around, but it never made sense to me to just flat out refuse to vote for someone just because they were nominated by Trump. You still gotta do your job and vote for each nominee on a case by case basis.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mike's avatar

    Not confirming the nominee for the 1st circuit was whatever since all 5 were liberals, not confirming the nominee for 6th circuit was unfortunate since it would have been nice since 7/9 is better than 6/10.

    But letting yourself lose the 3rd circuit tie AND ending up a wildy lawless judge like Emil is unforgivable.

    P.S. Looks like the GOP will confirm more nominees this month and next month then most months under Biden, they might end up having a pretty.

    Not sure how much longer they can keep the blue slip with how fast they’re filling up the red state vacancies.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Mitch's avatar

    Jordan Pratt of Florida got confirmed by a 52 to 47 vote, Joni Ernest didn’t vote for some reason.

    The Senate just invoked cloture on the nomination of Edmund LaCour by a vote of 53 to 46. Alex Padilla missed that vote.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Mitch's avatar

    The leak at John Doe turned out to be correct, the White House announced the three nominations today.

    Nicholas Ganjei– Acting U.S. Attorney and former Chief Counsel for U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, for the Southern District of Texas.

    David Clay Foulker– Acting U.S. Attorney for former ADA for Benton County, for the Western District of Arkansas.

    Aaron Peterson– currently leads the Natural Resources Section of the state Department of Justice, former ADA in Anchorage, for Alaska.

    All three are career prosecutors. Are they conventional nominees or people to be alarmed about?

    Liked by 1 person

      • beyondnonjd's avatar

        FWIW, as of now it looks like AFJ is only opposing two of the three. Peterson joins Van Hook and Mooty without the banner by his profile. Given Mooty’s comfortable confirmation margin, I’m now curious to see how many votes Van Hook gets in the EBM/cloture/floor votes. A bunch of articles already out on Crain, who seems destined to be another in the many party line votes.

        I saw posts explaining why Welch voted for Dudek and King explaining the Divine vote. So Lewis is the only one with a disconnect between multiple D Senators and AFJ so far.

        AFJ opposes all three NC nominees who received bipartisan EBM support (and the party line nominee obviously). Still think that’ll become a big (by our standards) story if Senate Rs tee up the former three for back-to-back-to-back votes over one or two days. Maybe next Tuesday/Wednesday if they do their Dunlap cloture/floor vote on Thursday/Monday?

        https://afj.org/nominees/?administration=527

        Liked by 1 person

  13. Zack Jones's avatar

    Did anyone catch former Senator Sinema making threats to a city council that they better go along with her on AI or they would face the wrath of Trump?

    I get being angry about some of the seats we didn’t fill at the end but that goes along with elections have consequences.

    Us not winning races in Wisconsin and North Carolina meant Manchin and Sinema were calling the shots on judicial nominees being confirmed or not (even with Republicans gone sometimes) and when they decided to start being pricks and saying no, that was that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Ryan J's avatar

      We got a vote a few days ago on the California National Guard case, which might provide a clue. Marsha Berzon wrote a statement (it’s a statement because Berzon is a senior judge who can’t vote, but it reads as a dissent and Berzon outright says the case should have been reheard)

      Statement: Berzon, joined by Murguia, Wardlaw, W. Fletcher, Gould, Paez, Christen, Hurwitz, Koh, Sanchez, Mendoza

      4 judges (Berzon, Fletcher, Paez, Hurwitz) are senior judges, leaving 7 active judges (Murguia, Wardlaw, Gould, Christen, Koh, Sanchez, Mendoza) who voted to rehear the case.

      9 active Democratic judges did not join the statement (and thus presumably voted not to rehear, unless they dissented without revealing their votes): Rawlinson, Nguyen, Owens, Friedland, Sung, H. Thomas, Desai, Johnstone, de Alba

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      Here are the likely names according to this article.

      Erin Nealy Cox: a partner at Kirkland & Ellis at their Dallas office and a former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. I’m kind of surprised, she strongly condemned the participants of January 6, 2021.

      Andrew Davis: a partner at Lehotsky Keller Cohn at their Austin office. Former Chief Counsel to Senator Ted Cruz.

      Chris Wolfe: a Tarrant County District Court Judge and longtime former Federal prosecutor.

      Rob Jones: Longtime AUSA for the Southern District of Texas. He’s worked extensively on border issues, which may have been his chief selling point to the White House.

      They seem to me to be more conventional than expected. Is there something that isn’t well known about any of them?

      Liked by 1 person

    • beyondnonjd's avatar

      Looks like they’re doing Tung cloture on Monday, Dunlap floor vote on Tuesday (or later), and Tung floor vote on Wednesday (or later).

      No idea what else they have going on next week, but they could confirm at least 2-3 of the N.C. nominees, depending how late they want to stay Thursday.

      The EBM was again cancelled today; at some point I’m sure we’ll find out what was happening behind the scenes with Mississippi.

      https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/executive_calendar/xcalv.pdf

      UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT
      Eric Chunyee Tung (Cal. No. 371) (PN400-3)
      Joshua D. Dunlap (Cal. No. 370) (PN400-1)

      Ordered, That at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, November 3, 2025, the cloture motion with respect to the
      nomination of Eric Chunyee Tung, of California, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit ripen.
      Ordered further, That at a time to be determined by the Majority Leader in consultation with the Democratic Leader no earlier than Tuesday, November 4, 2025, notwithstanding Rule XXII, the Senate vote on
      confirmation of the nomination of Joshua D. Dunlap, of Maine, to be United States Circuit Judge for the First
      Circuit.

      Ordered further, That if cloture is invoked on the Tung nomination that all post-cloture time be expired
      and the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination, notwithstanding Rule XXII, at a time to be determined
      by the Majority Leader in consultation with the Democratic Leader no earlier than Wednesday, November 5, 2025.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Zack Jones's avatar

    While I’m annoyed at the flip we’re about see on the 1st Circuit , it will still be a Democratic controlled court with Dunlap writing dissents for his whole career (yes I’m aware SCOTUS can take up cases but they’ll do that regardless.)
    Only way for it to not have happened was for William Kayatta to have announced senior status much earlier then he did when Manchin/Sinema were still playing nice.

    As for Tung, it sucks but Ikuta is a very conservative George W judge who before the 9th became more conservative under Trump would make it a point to complain about how conservative views weren’t welcome there.
    She was NEVER going to take senior status under Biden or a Democratic president if she could help it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      Dunlap will basically be the conservative version of Jane Kelly. Although Kelly usually dissents in high-profile cases, she is sometimes able to convince one of her conservative colleagues to join her, such as when the 8th circuit blocked Missouri’s abortion ban in 2021. I expect the same will be true for Dunlap

      Liked by 2 people

  25. Dequan's avatar

    Tonight was the first night I came home & turned on MSNBC since two nights after election night one year ago.

    Virginia went blue, New Jersey stayed blue, Mandani won NYC mayor, Prop 50 passed in California, all three Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices were retained & even Georgia, flipping two open Public Service Commission seats to Democrats. I think the country is starting to wake up. 

    This has to be a START. Democrats better not cave on the shutdown. They got the momentum & this is the only leverage they will have until at the earliest January 3, 2027.

    This is what happens when you run authentic candidates. AOC, Crockett & Pelota all should seriously consider US senate runs.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Zack's avatar

    Joshua Dunlap got confirmed last night.
    Frustrating to see this flip but at least he’ll be in the minority and I just don’t see other then Gelpi where the more liberal jurists will be joining him in any options regarding LGBT/reproductive/voting rights etc.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. beyondnonjd's avatar

    With 19 AIII confirmations so far after Tung just now (Wikipedia was updated before the vote ended!), I count:

    14 party line votes

    1 Collins/Murkowski + Ds/Is opposed (Bove)

    2 with 1 D/I in favor (King for Divine; Welch for Dudek)

    2 with > 1 D/1 in favor (14 for Mooty; 6 for Lewis)

    North Carolina batch the week of November 17-21?

    Still waiting to see if they end up keeping the EBM tomorrow. Crain and Van Hook added in red for the first time. Only non-Mississippi person eligible for a vote is a U.S. Attorney for North Carolina.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. lilee2122's avatar

    The 11th Circuit Couet has given Judge Aileen Cannon 60 days to rule on final disposition of the Jack Smith case on Mar Lago to include various motions and such..She blocked release in Jan.2025. Shes been sitting on the case since 2024 they said…

    Liked by 1 person

  29. beyondnonjd's avatar

    For those curious about the behind-the-scenes before the nominations happen, this news yesterday may be of interest.

    Daniel E. Burrows, of Colorado, to be an Assistant Attorney General, vice Aaron Reitz, resigned.

    For those who recall earlier this year: Senators sound off as DOJ’s judicial nominations lead steps down (https://www.courthousenews.com/senators-sound-off-as-dojs-judicial-nominations-lead-steps-down/).

    A lot of pieces from a lot of sides, so not sure if we’ll get more nominations/faster nominations. But I’ll definitely be curious.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Zack Jones's avatar

    I’m not happy about the Circuit court seats we lost either but as I said before, the problem was when we lost a chance to flip seats in NC and WI, we got left at the mercy of Manchin/Sinema (and likely Fetterman and others) and when they decided to start playing hardball, there was nothing to be done, even when some Republicans were gone.
    It sucks but it’s a harsh reminder of why every seat matters.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. beyondnonjd's avatar

    Given the topics often discussed below the line on this blog, I thought it would be interesting to share this article from earlier today.

    Judges Need to Know What Time It Is — Time to Go Senior, https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/judges-need-to-know-what-time-it-is-time-to-go-senior/

    Primary audience? The people around the ~23 (by my count, I may be slightly off) circuit judges appointed by Republican presidents eligible for senior status before the midterms? Obviously way more nuanced than that.

    Liked by 2 people

  32. Mike S.'s avatar

    Attempting to post this again, the first attempt is pending “moderation”:

    Some interesting commentary on the Alaska district court pick. Apparently, they aren’t including Murkowski in these discussions. Really hope that Mary Petola runs against Sullivan, and wins.

    https://www.dermotcole.com/reportingfromalaska/2025/10/29/trump-excluded-murkowski-favored-sullivan-with-federal-court-judge-pick

    Also, thanks everyone for the great articles you all have been posting recently. I always love hearing information about the judicial nomination process…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mike S.'s avatar

      I agree, it is hard to understand. The last judge confirmed to the D. Alaska resigned in disgrace (Joshua Kindred). You would think the two senators from Alaska would have an interest in finding very qualified nominees for the court, but that does not appear to be the case. Sullivan seems more interested in Federalist Society nominees, evidently that is his litmus test. Also, it’s mind boggling that he openly attacked Judge Gleason (the sole serving judge in active status, no doubt carrying a very full caseload). This additional blog post seems to indicate the current nominee isn’t exactly “Head of the Class”, in terms of academic credentials:

      https://www.dermotcole.com/reportingfromalaska/2025/11/1/federal-judge-nominee-lists-20-year-old-letter-to-the-editor-as-example-of-his-writing

      I also read the National Review article, which so kindly offered a road map/timeline to those Republican circuit court judges, who the author believes should be sending their retirement announcements to the White House – post haste! There is reason they are staying on the courts… the nudnik currently in office has very little respect for the rule of law. I have to imagine that is scaring off the last of the old school conservatives still on the bench from going senior.

      Liked by 2 people

  34. beyondnonjd's avatar

    I’ve been more focused on en banc decisions recently, and the Sixth Circuit just released another one focused on freedom of speech/transgender rights/schools: https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/25a0307p-06.pdf. Tinker 146 times throughout.

    MURPHY, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which, SUTTON, C.J., and BATCHELDER, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, THAPAR, BUSH, LARSEN, NALBANDIAN, and READLER, JJ., concurred. BATCHELDER, J. (pp. 36–38), KETHLEDGE, J. (pp. 39–45), THAPAR and NALBANDIAN, JJ. (pp. 46–57), and BUSH, J. (pp. 58–83), delivered separate concurring opinions. STRANCH, J. (pp. 84–112), delivered a separate dissenting opinion in which MOORE, CLAY, DAVIS, MATHIS, BLOOMEKATZ, and RITZ, JJ., concurred.

    *Pursuant to 6 Cir. I.O.P. 40(g), Composition of the En Banc Court, Judge Batchelder, a senior judge of the
    court who sat on the original panel in this case, participated in this decision. Judge Hermandorfer, whose commission date is July 17, 2025, did not participate in this appeal.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Mitch's avatar

    Judge Anne Hwang will preside over the trial of Jonathan Rinkerknecht, who ignited the spark that cause the Pacific Palisades fire. Hwang is a Biden appointee. Republicans are joking that since the judge was appointed by Biden, the perp will try to get a sentence reduction by claiming to be trans.

    Liked by 1 person

  36. beyondnonjd's avatar

    I’ve also been more interested in the local D.C. courts since the articles about Trump 2.0 and judicial selections (https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/21/donald-trump-washington-courts-00516892).

    For those interested, three new names added to the Executive Calendar on Wednesday. Guessing they’ll be in the next batch of nominees confirmed en bloc? I believe the first confirmed judge for the D.C. Superior Court was in that first big group.

    THE JUDICIARY

    • 525 466-7 Stephen F. Rickard, of the District of
      Columbia, to be an Associate Judge of the
      Superior Court of the District of Columbia for
      the term of fifteen years, vice Jonathan H.
      Pittman, retired.
    • 526 466-8 Elana S. Suttenberg, of the District of
      Columbia, to be an Associate Judge of the
      Superior Court of the District of Columbia for
      the term of fifteen years, vice Carol A.
      Dalton, retired.
    • 527 466-9 John Cuong Truong, of the District of
      Columbia, to be an Associate Judge of the
      Superior Court of the District of Columbia for
      the term of fifteen years, vice Wendell P.
      Gardner, Jr., retired.

    I’m spending much more time on precedent than judges these days, but always happy to chat over email with other commenters interested in the topic.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mitch's avatar

      Nominating judges for the D.C. courts is different than for Federal judges. The White House has to approve of a nominee from a list provided by the Washington D.C. Nominating Commission. It’s been that was singe 1973.

      There has been speculation that the Trump Administration would bypass the commission. That might not be legal. So far that hasn’t happened. All three of the nominees were part of a list from the commission.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dequan's avatar

        I’m sure Trump nominating whoever he wanted would hold up in court. I highly doubt it’s written anywhere in law that a president must only choose nominees from a commission for local DC judges. I would assume it’s a norm & we all know norms don’t mean anything in a court of law. Of course we wouldn’t be having this conversation had the local DC judges been included in the “deal” so at least Biden could have filed most of the vacancies.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Mitch's avatar

        @Dequan

        Here are brief bios of the three nominees, who I don’t think will be controversial.

        Stephen Rickard: Magistrate Judge on the D.C. Superior Court since 2022. Was an AUSA from 2009-2022, including Chief of the General Crimes Section and Deputy Chief of the Felony Major Crimes Section.

        Elena Sutterberg: AUSA since 2012, currently Special Counsel for the Policy & Legislative Affairs Section. She was previously the AUSA for the section prosecuting domestic violence and child abuse division, which has to be the most difficult job in the department.

        John Truong: His parents, Brian and Mae, were asylum seekers from Vietnam known as “boat people.” AUSA since 2005, Deputy Chief of the Civil Division since 2022. He was nominated by the Biden Administration in 2024 but was not acted upon.

        Liked by 1 person

      • beyondnonjd's avatar

        Yup! And one level above: JNC Announces Court of Appeals Vacancies https://www.dcbar.org/news-events/news/jnc-announces-court-of-appeals-vacancies

        November 06, 2025

        The D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission (JNC) invites qualified individuals to apply for vacancies on the District of Columbia Court of Appeals resulting from the retirement of Judge Kathryn A. Oberly in 2013 and the resignation of Judge Lauren L. AliKhan in 2023. After a previous application process, the U.S. Senate returned the nominations for each of these vacancies, and the president did not nominate any applicants. The deadline to apply for the vacancies is noon on January 15, 2026.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ryan J's avatar

      I disagree. I think Padilla is a pretty good senator and imo Padilla is the better of the two.

      Padilla went to a DHS meeting and questioned Kristi Noem about the ICE raids. Noem had guards drag Padilla out of there. Padilla’s voting pattern is also a bit more liberal than Schiff’s, with Schiff having voted to confirm a few Trump nominees confirmed with <10 Democratic votes.

      Liked by 2 people

      • shawnee68's avatar

        I believe that Schiff has a better track record when It comes to opposing Trump. There’s a reason why Trump despises Schiff and we all know why.

        The baseball season ended last Sunday. To argue and confront Kristi Noem at speaking engagement I will have to concede came off as a stunt. It’s pointless to argue with people who work for ICE or run the agency itself about how they do their job. It’s arguing balls and strikes which is the first rule that you learn about baseball.

        There are instances where people took their complaints to court when some actions by ICE were perceived as heavy handed. That’s where they belong.

        Don’t get me wrong what happened to Padilla that day wasn’t right. But, what he did wasn’t right either.

        I don’t think Padilla is that good on judges. I was very disappointed when he sought Ana De Alba for the 9th Circuit vacancy(Watford I think).

        She had only been a district judge for a few months or maybe less than that. He found someone with a background similar to own. Lot’s of judges who spent several years with crowded dockets passed over.

        For those of who live in California, I am sure no one would rank Padilla anywhere near (I know he is new) Harris, Boxer and Feinstein.

        Not everyone Trump will nominate will be bad. So, I am not in favor of blind opposition or opposing someone just because you can do it.

        Like

  40. beyondnonjd's avatar

    For those who had not seen, news on two Reagan appointees who were on senior status (one passing away, one retiring).

    • Passing of the Honorable William D. Keller. The United States District Court for the Central District of California mourns the loss of Senior District Judge William D. Keller, who passed away on Sunday, November 2, 2025 at the age of 91 (court website)
    • US District Court Judge Mark Wolf retires after 40 years on federal bench (Boston Globe and a few other outlets)

    For those curious about the breakdown between assigned cases for the judges (active and senior), the Eastern District of Kentucky just updated now that Judge Meredith has started: https://www.kyed.uscourts.gov/sites/kyed/files/gen25-16.pdf

    FJC is on lapse so no updates to when newly confirmed judges have received their commissions. But district courts have been updating their websites.

    Liked by 2 people

  41. beyondnonjd's avatar

    Given the name of this website, I thought Tiana Headley’s latest (I recommend bookmarking for big news) was of interest.

    “The Trump administration has narrowed the window between when judicial nominees get publicly announced and when they appear at their confirmation hearings, cutting short the time outside groups have to vet these lifetime appointments.”

    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/legal-ethics/trump-changes-how-judicial-nominees-get-publicly-revealed?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=LENW&utm_campaign=0000019a-3bca-d50a-abfa-3bdbd4a70001

    Liked by 1 person

  44. shawnee68's avatar

    The “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party has a serious problem with ageism. The “60 year old” replaced a younger judge who did not want to spend the prime years of his life authoring dissents on a government salary.

    There’s no guarantee that a much younger nominee would want to stick around. Paul Watford did the same traded his judgeship for a 7 figure salary .

    There will be plenty of opportunities to fix the courts if we focus on the future and not the past.

    Like

    • Dequan's avatar

      Again you are confusing the definition of ageism. Ageism is discriminating based on age. Being a federal judge has an age limit built in as to when they are eligible for senior status even though it is a lifetime appointment. So age is an extremely important variable. 

      And also you keep bringing up the few examples of judges leaving the bench before they are eligible. You keep using the same examples because there are so few of them. So yes, age matters. 

      Liked by 2 people

  45. beyondnonjd's avatar

    https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges

    For those interested, FJC is now updated post-shutdown.

    Dates of commissions:

    • Judge Tailbleson: November 3 (not yet assumed office)
    • Judge Dunlap: November 7 (not yet assumed office)
    • Judge Tung: November 7 (not yet assumed office)

    Of the seven district judges, I believe only Judge Mercer has not yet assumed office.

    Would love to see something empirical on whether circuits are going en banc more often these days. Way outside of my knowledge area (along with many other things!).

    And for those interested, Tiana Headley’s latest update on the North Carolina/Mississippi showdown: you can google GOP Senator Blocks Trump Judge Picks to Get Tribe Recognized (already at my one link limit for posts).

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mike S.'s avatar

      Thank you for sharing. The article on the MS picks is very interesting and worth the read. Seems like it will resolve itself and Tillis will remove his hold in due time. I am struggling to remember an example where something like this happened in the past:

      “Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) has kept President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees in Mississippi from advancing as he seeks to compel federal recognition for an indigenous group as a tribe in his state.

      Tillis, who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, continues to hold up the panel’s votes on four Mississippi federal trial court and US attorney nominees as leverage in his negotiations with Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) around including federal recognition of the Lumbee in the National Defense Authorization Act, a spokesperson for the senator confirmed.

      The dispute has been an unusual GOP intra-party disruption to the president’s push to appoint his picks to lifetime judgeships and key prosecutor positions.”

      (Also, I did not realize there is a one link per post restriction… good to know!)

      I remain grateful that so few circuit court judges have gone senior thus far. I think because Trump is so crazy, and has such little respect for judicial authority, judges will wait him out. OR, if Democrats win back the Senate, they may see that as an opportune time to pack it in… 

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dequan's avatar

        On the Democrat side, I remember when Senator Menendez initially refused to back Patty Schwartz for the 3rd Circuit. At first I wasn’t happy with her nomination because she seemed to be a bland nominee but when I saw Menendez didn’t want her, that automatically made me like her more. I didn’t trust him much even back then for some reason. Just my gut. 

        Liked by 2 people

  46. beyondnonjd's avatar

    Didn’t see anyone post this yet: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-taps-former-thomas-clerk-transgender-sports-foe-judgeships-2025-11-14/.

    Justin Olson to serve as Judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana

    Megan Benton to serve as Judge on the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri

    Brian Lea to serve as Judge on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee

    Liked by 2 people

  49. beyondnonjd's avatar

    So far, Justin Olson seems to have received the most coverage of the three new announcements. You can see a feature on Brian Lea from UGA’s law school highlighting the clerkship he was about to start for Justice Thomas (https://www.law.uga.edu/sites/default/files/news-events/Adv2011%20Headlines.pdf).

    And for Megan Benton, Senator Schmitt congratulated on X (haven’t see anything from Senator Hawley yet). Tried finding some tea leaves for whose seat she’s being slotted for. If she’s in the Wednesday hearing, we should know through the Congress(dot)gov website’s PN numbers in the description section, even if we do not get something on the White House website or announced otherwise.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to Mike Cancel reply