Judge Michael Newman – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio

A well-respected magistrate judge with bona fides on both sides of the political spectrum, Judge Michael Newman is Trump’s fourth nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.

Background

Michael Jay Newman was born in Somerville, New Jersey, in 1960.[1]  Newman received a B.F.A. from New York University in 1982 and his J.D. from American University Washington College of Law in 1989, after having spent three years as a screenwriter and filmmaker.[2]  After graduation, Newman became a clerk to Judge Jack Sherman, a U.S. Magistrate Judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, in whose chambers he stayed until 2003, barring a one-year stint clerking for Judge Nathaniel Jones on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.[3]

In 2003, Newman became an associate with Dinsmore & Shohl LLP in Cincinatti, becoming a Partner with the firm in 2006.[4]  In 2011, Newman was appointed to be a U.S. Magistrate Judge with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, where he has stayed since.

History of the Seat

Newman has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.  This seat was vacated on February 15, 2019, when Judge Michael Barrett moved to senior status.  Newman applied with a selection commission put together by Ohio Senators Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, and Rob Portman, a Republican.[5]  Newman interviewed with the Commission on October 5 2019, and was recommended to the White House by the senators in November.[6]  He was nominated in February 2020.  

Legal Experience

Newman spent most of his pre-bench career as a law clerk, working in the chambers of Judges Jack Sherman and Nathaniel Jones.  From 2003 to 2011, Newman worked at Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, working on labor and employment, business, and appellate litigation.  In his time at the firm, Newman tried one case as lead counsel and one as associate counsel.[7]

Newman notably represented the Petitioner before the Supreme Court in CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries.[8]  While Newman did not argue the case, he participated in briefing and the Supreme Court ultimately sided with his position in a 7-2 opinion agreeing that plaintiffs could file suits under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (Sec. 1981) alleging retaliation.[9]

Jurisprudence

Since 2011, Newman has served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, which covers much of Southern Ohio.  In that capacity, Newman presides over misdemeanors and petty offenses, supervises discovery, and presides over civil matters where the parties consent to his jurisdiction.

Among his more notable rulings, Newman granted summary judgment to an employer, finding that a voluntary employment program allowing some customer service technicians to drive directly from their homes to customers did not discriminate against ineligible employees.[10]  In another case, Newman refused to delay a wrongful death trial relating to an inmate who died after suffering a seizure before being put in handcuffs.[11]

Political Activity

Newman has a few donations of record, all to Republicans.[12]  In addition, Newman has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2008.[13]

Overall Assessment

Judge Newman should win confirmation by a bipartisan margin.  Conservatives will be thrilled with Newman’s Federalist Society credentials and Republican political history while liberals will be assuaged that Newman has largely worked as a plaintiff’s side and civil rights attorney.


[1] Sen. Comm. on the Judiciary, 116th Cong., Michael Newman: Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees 1.

[2] Id. at 3.

[3] Id. at 2.

[4] Id.

[5] Id. at 85-86.

[6] See id.

[7] See id. at 72.

[8] 553 U.S. 442 (2008).

[9] See id.

[10] Swann v. Time Warner Entertainment Co., 126 F. Supp. 3d 973 (S.D. Ohio 2015).

[11] See Mark Gokavi, Jail Death Lawsuit: County Wants to Delay Trial, But Judge Says No, Dayton Daily News, June 26, 2018.

[13] See Newman, supra n. 1 at 9.

Judge J. Philip Calabrese – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio

In 2019, J. Philip Calabrese was appointed to the Cuhayoga County Superior Court to replace Judge Pamela Barker, who was President Trump’s first appointee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.  Now, Calabrese looks likely to follow Barker onto the federal bench.

Background

Jude Philip Calabrese was born in Evanston, Illinois, in 1971.  Calabrese received his B.A. summa cum laude from the College of the Holy Cross in 1993 and his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 2000.[1]  After law school, Calabrese clerked for Judge Alice Batchelder on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.    

After his clerkship, Calabrese joined Thompson Hine LLP in Cleveland as an Associate.[2]  In 2003, he moved to Squire Sanders LLP, where he became a Partner in 2009.  In 2014, he moved to become a Partner at Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP.  

In 2019, Gov. Michael DeWine appointed Calabrese to serve on the Cuyahoga County Superior Court to replace Judge Pamela Barker, who was confirmed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. He continues to serve in that capacity today.

History of the Seat

Calabrese has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.  This seat was vacated on January 6, 2020, when Judge Christopher Boyko moved to senior status.  In April 2019, Calabrese applied for the judgeship with Senator Rob Portman (R-OH).[3]  Calabrese interviewed before a bipartisan advisory committee set up by Portman and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) in October 2019.[4]  After getting the Committee’s recommendation, Calabrese interviewed with the White House and was nominated in February 2020.

Legal Experience

Calabrese worked in private practice between 2001 and his appointment to the bench in 2019.  Over the course of his career, Calabrese tried approximately 12 cases.  Calabrese’s experience is primarily in civil litigation, particularly in representing various industries.

Notably, Calabrese represented Cavel International Inc., the last horse slaughterhouse in the United States, in seeking to block Illinois regulations that would have shut down the business.[5]  Calabrese argued that moral outrage against the consumption of horses should not govern whether they are permitted to be consumed.[6]  Calabrese’s position, however, was rejected by the Seventh Circuit.[7]         

Calabrese has also been active in defending industries against mass tort litigation alleging widespread damages.  For example, Calabrese defended the manufacturer of medical supplies against claims alleging that one of their “contrast agents” caused a rare skin thickening condition.[8]  Calabrese similarly defended a company against claims that a food additive they used for microwave popcorn caused lung damage in workers at their plants.[9]

Jurisprudence

Calabrese has served as a judge on the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas since his appointment in 2019 by Gov. Mike De Wine.  In that capacity, Calabrese handles civil cases as well as criminal felony cases and, in his short tenure on the bench has presided over 3 cases that have gone to judgment and verdict.[10]  Among his most notable cases, Calabrese presided over the jury trial of a 17-year-old defendant charged with the death of his cousin.[11] 

Political Activity

Calabrese is a Republican who has occasionally contributed to the Ohio Republican Party.[12] Notably, Calabrese made two contributions adding up to $550 to the Party in late 2019, after his appointment to the state bench.[13]

Overall Assessment

On the whole, there is little in Calabrese’s background that will cause him trouble in the confirmation process.  While some may object to Calabrese’s legal work before he joined the bench (particularly those with a moral objection to horse slaughter), such objections are unlikely to prove dispositive for the nomination.  Similarly, while some may raise an eyebrow regarding a judge making political contributions, such an act may be seen as par for the course in a state with judicial elections, such as Ohio.


[1] Sen. Comm. on the Judiciary, 116th Cong., Philip Calabrese: Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees 1.

[2] Id. at 2.

[3] Id. at 57.

[4] Id.

[5] See Cavel Int’l. v. Madigan, 500 F.3d 551 (7th Cir. 2007).

[6] See Brian Landman, Companions, ‘Not Dinner’, St. Petersburg Times, July 1, 2007.

[7] Andrew Harris and Tony C. Dreibus, Last U.S. Horse Slaughterer Loses Appeal; Court Rules That Illinois Legislature Has Right to Ban a Business, Int’l. Herald Tribune, Sept. 24, 2007.

[8] In re Gadolinum-Based Contrast Agents Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 1909, No. 1:08-gd-50000 (N.D. Ohio).

[9] See Remmes v. Int’l. Flavors & Fragrances, Inc., 453 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (N.D. Iowa 2006).

[10] See Calabrese, supra n. 1 at 16.

[11] State v. Thorpe, Case No. CR-18-634964-A.

[13] See id.

Judge Brett Ludwig – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

The vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin left open by Judge Rudolph Randa is one of the oldest unfilled vacancies in the country.  The Trump Administration’s first nominee for this seat, Gordon Giampietro, failed to fill confirmation after controversial writings from his past came to light during the confirmation process.  The Trump Administration is now trying again by nominating U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Brett Ludwig.

Background

Brett H. Ludwig was born in Marshfield in central Wisconsin in 1969.[1]  Ludwig received his B.A. with Highest Honors from the University of Wisconsin in 1991 and his J.D. magna cum laude from the University of Minnesota in 1994.[2]  After graduating law school, Ludwig clerked for Judge George Fagg on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.[3]

After his clerkship, Ludwig joined the Milwaukee Office of Foley & Lardner.[4]  Ludwig eventually rose to become a Partner in 2003 and Vice Chair of the firm’s Insurance & Reinsurance Litigation Practice.[5]  Ludwig held that position until 2017, when he was appointed to be a U.S. Magistrate Judge, in which role he serves today.

History of the Seat

Ludwig has been nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, to a seat vacated on February 5, 2016, by Judge Rudolph Randa.  Interestingly, Randa had expressed his interest in moving to senior status back in 2007, and the Bush Administration had nominated state judge Timothy Dugan to replace him.[6]  However, Dugan was never confirmed by the then-Democratic senate, and, after the election of President Obama, Randa reversed his desire to go on senior status.

In February 2017, Wisconsin senators Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin, a Republican and a Democrat, respectively, announced the renewal of their bipartisan Judicial Nominating Commission.  The Committee produced four names to the White House in August 2017.[7]  After interviews with the White House Counsel’s Office and the Department of Justice, Gordon Giampietro was nominated on December 20, 2017.

On February 2015, 2018, Zoe Tillman at Buzzfeed broke the story that Giampietro had, in his writings and interviews, made “disparaging comments about diversity, same-sex relationships, and birth control.”[8]  Specifically, in a 2015 radio interview, Giampietro stated that it was “irrefutable” that children were best-raised by heterosexual couples and that same-sex relationships were troubled.[9]  In other comments, Giampietro referred to the birth control pill as an “assault on nature” and suggested that diversity was “code for relaxed standards.”[10]  In response to the story, Baldwin indicated that the statements had not been disclosed to the Evaluation Commission and that they “raise serious questions about whether this nominee would be able to serve as a fair and impartial judge.”[11] 

In response, Giampietro wrote to Baldwin privately arguing that the article “reads like an attack on my Catholic faith.”[12]  Additionally, five Wisconsin based Catholic bishops wrote to Baldwin arguing that Giampietro was “not receiving a fair hearing because of his Catholic faith.”[13]  Furthermore, members of the Evaluation Commission disagreed as to the significance of the undisclosed statements, with Republican member Rick Esenberg arguing that the statements were irrelevant while Democratic member Barbara Quindel indicating that the Commission would not have recommended Giampitro if they had known about the statements.[14]

Faced with this new information, Baldwin declined to return a blue slip on Giampietro, and no hearing was ever held on his nomination.  After Baldwin won re-election in 2018, Giampietro’s nomination was not sent back to the Senate.

After the Trump Administration declined to nominate any of the other candidates recommended by Baldwin and Johnson, the Senators sent a new list of four candidates to the White House in December 2019.[15]  Trump nominated Ludwig from that list on February 27, 2020.[16]

Legal Experience

Excluding his time as a clerk, Ludwig has spent his entire pre-bench career at the firm of Foley & Lardner, where he focused primarily on insurance litigation.  For example, Ludwig represented Hamlin Inc., an insurance company seeking to recover liability costs from its liability insurers.[17]  In his career, Ludwig has tried around 13 cases to verdict, including cases before arbitration tribunals.[18]

Among his more prominent cases, Ludwig represented the Ford Motor Company in a jury trial concerning a “Lemon Law” claim regarding a Ford semi-tractor.[19]  Ludwig has also represented criminal defendants in federal court, notably representing a defendant challenging his 58-month sentence for armed robbery.[20]   

Jurisprudence

Since 2017, Ludwig has served as a U.S. Bankruptcy Judge.  In this role, Ludwig reviews federal bankruptcy filings and proceedings.  In one of his earlier rulings as a bankruptcy judge, Ludwig held that a litigant who had filed six bankruptcy proceedings but had failed to comply with requirements under the code was abusing the bankruptcy process.[21]  In another, Ludwig allowed creditors to recover for claims filed on an untimely basis, finding that a previously entered bankruptcy order in the case permitted reorganization and payment on the creditor’s proof of claims.[22]

Overall Assessment

While the Trump Administration may be burned from its previous failure at filling this seat, Ludwig lacks all the factors that made Giampietro’s confirmation difficult.  Ludwig lacks a strong record of controversial statements, has little to no involvement in politics, and has spent his entire career in insurance and bankruptcy litigation, an area that generally attracts little controversy.  As such, Ludwig looks likely to keep the support of his home-state senators and to be confirmed in due course.


[1] Sen. Comm. on the Judiciary, 116th Cong., Brett Ludwig: Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees 1.  See also Riley Vetterkind, Trump Nominates Ludwig to Fill Judicial Vacancy, Wisconsin State Journal, Feb. 27, 2020.

[2] ConsiderChapter13, Brett H. Ludwig Names U.S. Bankruptcy Judge, The NACTT Academy Blog, Feb. 5, 2017, https://considerchapter13.org/2017/02/05/brett-h-ludwig-named-u-s-bankruptcy-court-judge/.  

[3] See id.

[4] See id.

[5] See id.

[6] Ludwig had applied to fill that vacancy but was not selected.

[7] See id.

[8] Zoe Tillman, One of Trump’s Judicial Nominees Once Wrote That Diversity is “Code for Relaxed Standards”, BuzzFeed News, Feb. 15, 2018, https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/one-of-trumps-judicial-nominees-once-wrote-that-diversity?utm_term=.bunlpv57b#.ferWeqXP9.  

[9] See id.

[10] See id. (citing Ludwig’s comments).

[11] See id. (quoting Sen. Tammy Baldwin’s spokesperson).

[12] Bill Glauber and Daniel Bice, Catholic Bishops Call on Tammy Baldwin Not to Block Judicial Nomination of Gordon Giampietro, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Feb. 27, 2018, https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/27/catholic-bishops-call-tammy-baldwin-not-block-nomination-gordon-Ludwig-federal-bench/377622002/.

[13] See id. (quoting Letter from The Bishops of the State of Wisconsin to Sen. Tammy Baldwin (Feb. 20, 2018)).

[14] See id.

[15] Riley Vetterkind, Baldwin, Johnson Offer 4 for Bench; Federal Judgeship, Wisconsin State Journal, Dec. 16, 2019.

[16] See Vetterkind, supra n. 1.

[17] See Hamlin Inc. v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., 86 F.3d 93 (7th Cir. 1996).

[18] See Ludwig, supra n. 1 at 26.

[19] Conrad v. Ford Motor Co., Case No. 94-CV-2545 (Waukesha County Circuit Court).

[20] United States v. Ward, 71 F.3d 262 (7th Cir. 1995).

[21] See In re Mendiola, 573 B.R. 758 (E.D. Wis. Bankr. 2017).

[22] See In re Wulff, 598 B.R. 459 (E.D. Wis. Bankr. 2019).

Judge Hala Jarbou – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan

In 2019, the Trump Administration negotiated an agreement over two district nominees with Michigan’s Democratic senators.  Ironically, the Republican half of the agreement, Michael Bogren, withdrew due to opposition from Republican senators, while the Democratic half, Judge Stephanie Davis, sailed to confirmation.  Now, Bogren has been replaced as a nominee by Judge Hala Jarbou, who would, if confirmed, be the first Chaldean-American on the federal bench.[1]

Background

The 48-year-old Jarbou was born in Iraq as a member of the Chaldean Christian community.[2]  Her family moved to the United States when she was a child.[3]  Jarbou received her Bachelor of Business Administration from the University of Michigan and her J.D. from Wayne State University Law School.[4]  After graduation, Jarbou started her career as an assistant prosecuting county with the Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office and then moved onto the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan in 2010 under newly appointed U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade.[5] 

In 2015, Jarbou was appointed as an Oakland County Circuit Judge by Governor Rick Snyder.  She still serves on the court.

History of the Seat

Jarbou has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan.  This seat opened on January 31, 2017, when Judge Robert Bell moved to senior status.  After extensive negotiations, Trump nominated attorney Michael Bogren on March 11, 2019.  However, Bogren’s nomination ran into opposition from Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee, who objected to Bogren’s advocacy on behalf of the City of Grand Rapids in enforcing its anti-discrimination ordinances.[6]  While Bogren likely had enough support to advance, he chose to withdraw his nomination.[7]

On March 18, 2020, Jarbou’s nomination was submitted to the U.S. Senate by the Trump Administration to replace Bogren.

Legal Career

Jarbou has held two primary positions in her pre-bench career.  From 1997 to 2010, Jarbou worked as an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney with the Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office, where she prosecuted sexual and violent crimes.  For example, Jarbou prosecuted boxing coach Ruben Flores for allegedly fondling the breast of a 16-year-old girl.[8]

Then, from 2010 to 2015, Jarbou worked as a federal prosecutor with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan. At the office, Jarbou handled a wide variety of cases, from narcotics cases to corruption.  For example, Jarbou prosecuted Lorris Capshaw, a clerk with the Wayne County Clerk’s Office, for accepting bribes in exchange for Concealed Pistol licenses.[9]

Political Activity

Jarbou is a Republican with one political contribution of record, a 2007 contribution to Republican Rep. Joe Knollenberg.[10]  In 2004, Jarbou was a supporter of President George W. Bush’s re-election.[11]  Jarbou has also been a member of the Federalist Society for Law & Policy since 2011.[12]

Jurisprudence

Jarbou has served as a state circuit judge since her appointment in 2015.  In her role as a trial judge, Jarbou notably presided over a land dispute between Holly Township and the Smith family.[13]  The fight involved a ten acre parcel of land that the town had seized from the family under foreclosure proceedings.[14]  Jarbou ultimately approved a consent decree that allowed the family to retain possession of the land.[15]  In another matter, Jarbou sentenced Brieanna Smart to a year in jail for hitting a police officer with her car while he attempted to arrest her for driving on a suspended license.[16]  Jarbou also presided over a defamation lawsuit brought by U.S. Rep. Kerry Bentvolio against fellow Republican Rocky Raczkowski.[17]

Overall Assessment

Like Bogren, Jarbou is a Republican with strongly conservative credentials.  But unlike Bogren, Jarbou doesn’t have any particular controversies in her background that might trigger Republican opposition.  As such, Jarbou is poised to become the first Chaldean American jurist on the federal bench.


[1] Paul Natinsky, Hala Jarbou is First Chaldean American Nominated for Federal Bench, Chaldean News, Mar. 27, 2020, https://www.chaldeannews.com/features-1/2020/3/27/hala-jarbou-is-first-chaldean-american-nominated-for-federal-bench.  

[2] See Charlie Cain, Cheney Questions Kerry’s Ability to Lead; He Tells Michigan Supporters Country Needs Bush At Helm, Detroit News, Sept. 22, 2004.

[3] See id.

[5] See id.

[6] Melissa Nann Burke, Michigan Judicial Nominee Bogren Withdraws From Consideration, Detroit News, June 11, 2019, https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/11/michigan-federal-judicial-nominee-pulls-nomination/1423875001/.  

[7] See id.

[8] A.P., Boxing Coach Arraigned on Fondling Charges, A.P. State & Local Wire, Sept. 13, 2003.

[9] Press Release, Office for the Department of Justice, Former Employee at the Wayne County Clerk’s Office Pleads Guilty to Bribery, June 19, 2014.

[11] See Cain, supra n. 1.

[12] See Jarbou, supra n. 3.

[13] See Mike Martindale, Property Fight in Holly Twp. Adds Twist, Detroit News, Nov. 14, 2016.

[14] See id.

[15] Mike Martindale, Family Gets Deed, Will Return to Holly Twp. Land, Detroit News, Mar. 9, 2017.

[16] Woman Who Slammed Officer with Car in Detroit Area Gets Jail, The Daily Cardinal: University of Wisconsin – Madison, Dec. 18, 2015.

[17] Mike Martindale, Ex-Rep Sues Candidate for Defamation, Detroit News, May 17, 2018.

Judge Justin Walker – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Last October, a former clerk to Justices Anthony Kennedy and Brett Kavanaugh was appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, despite having never tried a single case.  What the nominee lacked in trial experience, however, he made up for in media experience, having made 162 media appearances in support of Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation.[1]  Now, despite only being a judge for six months, Judge Justin Walker has been handpicked by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, with the recommendation of Kennedy and Kavanaugh, for elevation to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Background

A native of the Bluegrass state, Justin Reed Walker was born in 1982 in Louisville.  He attended Duke University and Harvard Law School, getting his J.D. in 2009.[2]  During law suit, Walker worked as a summer associate at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Washington D.C.  He was hired by the firm as an Associate upon graduation.[3]  Walker left the firm on hiatus to clerk for Justice Brett Kavanaugh (when he was on the D.C. Circuit) and then for Justice Anthony Kennedy.[4]

In 2013, Walker returned to Louisville to practice law on his own.  He left in 2019 to join Dinsmore & Scholl LLP as a Partner of Counsel.  Additionally, since 2015, Walker has been a Professor with the University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law.

In June 2018, Walker expressed his interest in a judgeship with Sen. Mitch McConnell.[5]  Walker was nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, to a seat opened on June 9, 2019, when Judge Joseph McKinley moved to senior status.  While Walker was rated “Unqualified” for the seat by the American Bar Association, he was nonetheless confirmed on October 24, 2019 on a 50-41 party-line vote, and has served on the Court since.

History of the Seat

Walker has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to be vacated on September 1, 2020 by Judge Thomas Griffith.  Griffith’s retirement came days after news broke that McConnell was pressuring judges to move to senior status to open vacancies for the Administration to fill.[6]  As a result, some liberal groups have alleged a corrupt bargain, and one has written to Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan on the D.C. Circuit asking for a formal investigation.[7]  To this date, no investigation has been announced.

Legal Experience

Walker’s limited litigation experience almost entirely consists of practicing on his own.  His stints at firms are limited to a short time as an Associate at Gibson Dunn (where he represented Philip Morris in a RICO action with the federal government)[8] and his current position at Dinsmore & Scholl LLP.

Most of his time as a solo practitioner, Walker was a full time law professor.  As such, by his own account, Walker has not tried a single case as primary counsel.[9]  Additionally, he has served as Associate Counsel in only a single criminal case.[10] 

Jurisprudence

Despite only being a judge for around six months, Walker has already authored a number of opinions that can be analyzed.  In review, critics may point to the sharp and sometimes intemperate tone of the opinions, as well as their frequently cursory analysis of legal and factual issues.

Church Restrictions

In 2020, Walker was assigned a lawsuit brought by the On Fire Christian Center challenging a regulation by Mayor Greg Fischer that restricted gatherings on Easter, including religious gatherings.[11]  Walker granted an injunction preventing the regulation from being enforced against On Fire.[12]  Notably, Walker granted the injunction on an ex parte basis, meaning that he did not give the City an opportunity to respond to the initial petition.[13] 

In his opinion, Walker was sharply critical of the regulation, accusing the mayor of having “criminalized the communal celebration of Easter.”[14]  However, there are a few issues with this statement.  First, as Walker acknowledges later in the opinion, Fischer had not threatened any criminal sanctions against anyone who violated his civil restriction.[15]  Walker papers over this fact by arguing that Fischer’s order authorized the Louisville Metro Police to hand out information relating to the risk and follow up with individuals who had attended events to ensure their health and safety and that these actions constitute “law enforcement.”[16]  Second, the City had not intended any enforcement action based on the Mayor’s regulations, which the City could have informed the Court of, had Walker chosen to hear from both sides before issuing his order.[17]  Given this fact, Walker’s statement that adherents could “risk arrest, mandatory quarantine, or some other enforcement action”[18] seems to fall contrary to the evidence in the case.

Furthermore, Walker’s opinion diverts from legal analysis to include editorial comments regarding unrelated issues, from abortion and birth control[19] to Sen. Robert Byrd’s disavowed membership in the Ku Klux Klan.[20]  Walker further takes out more time to quote directly from the Bible and detail the history of “political persecution” faced by Christians.[21]  Walker’s language in the opinion has been criticized, even by conservatives, as intemperate and “over-the-top.”[22] 

In contrast, Walker arguably fails to engage fully with Supreme Court and Sixth Circuit caselaw on the Free Exercise question.  The entire opinion cites only two Sixth Circuit cases, and neither are cited on the substantive questions of whether the Free Exercise Clause has been violated.[23]  Surprisingly, on-point Sixth Circuit cases on the Free Exercise Clause such as Bible Believers v. Wayne County[24] and Prater v. City of Burnside[25] are nowhere to be found in Walker’s opinion. 

Motions to Suppress

As a district court judge, Walker has had the opportunity to rule on motions to suppress brought by criminal defendants, which he has usually denied.  For example, in one case, after a defendant’s house was searched pursuant to a warrant, the defendant challenged the sufficiency of the affidavit upon which the warrant was issued.[26]  The defendant argued that, under Sixth Circuit precedent, the mere fact that he was a drug dealer could not support an inference that drugs would be found in his home.[27]  Walker acknowledged this precedent but then sidestepped it, arguing that this case was different because the defendant here was a “full-time” drug dealer.[28]  Walker noted:

“Full-time drug dealers obviously do not run their illegal operations from corporate headquarters registered with the Secretary of State.  They use their cars, their stash houses, and their homes.”[29] 

Walker’s ruling here arguably conflicts with Sixth Circuit precedent in United States v. Brown.[30]  In Brown, the Sixth Circuit overturned a search of the home of a known drug dealer where the warrant affidavit did not include “facts showing that the residence had been used in drug trafficking, such as an informant who observed drug deals or drug paraphernalia in or around the residence.”[31]

If such facts exist in Anderson, Walker’s opinion does not highlight them.  Rather, Walker relies almost exclusively on the defendant’s status as a drug dealer and the fact that he was observed driving to and from a stash house and his home.[32]  Walker’s distinction between a full-time and part-time drug dealer also doesn’t connect back to Brown, which doesn’t focus on such a distinction.

In another opinion, Walker denied a defendant’s request for a Franks hearing to probe potential false statements made in a search warrant affidavit.[33]  Walker held that the defendant was not entitled to a hearing because he had failed to make the requisite preliminary showings.[34]  However, in his ruling, Walker criticizes the motion for being “frivolous” and suggests that defense counsel had made “false statements” and “material omissions.”[35]  Walker’s accusation appears to arise from two contradictory statements made by defense counsel during oral argument on the motion.[36]  Walker also dismisses a secondary argument made by the defense with two words: “Wrong again.”[37]

Civil Rulings

Among the civil rulings he has made, Walker issued notice to a plaintiff that he would sua sponte grant summary judgment against one of their claims unless they withdrew the claim or responded to the court’s notice,[38] remanded cases from federal court for lack of diversity jurisdiction,[39] and dismissed a plaintiff’s case for failure of prosecution, while acknowledging lack of notice of dismissal but noting that any such notice would be “futile.”[40]  In one notable decision, Walker dismissed the discrimination claims made by a terminated employee, finding that her complaint lacked sufficient allegations to support her claim.[41]  Interestingly, Walker dismissed the complaint with prejudice arguing that any amendment would be futile.[42]  Walker based this decision on the plaintiff’s failure to amend as a matter of course within 21 days of her initial complaint and her not-specifically requesting permission to amend.[43] This framing is particularly interesting because Sixth Circuit precedent treats the futility of amended complaints as a separate analysis from a party’s failure to seek such remedies.[44]  Walker does not explain in his opinion why a plaintiff’s failure to specifically seek amendment relates to the “futility” of such amendment.

Writings

As a law professor, Walker has been fairly vocal on legal and policy issues.  This is clearly a well-ingrained characteristic, as Walker was an active writer even as a college student.

Kavanaugh Confirmation

During the campaign to confirm Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, Walker was one of his former boss’ most prominent surrogates on tv and in the media.  In some of his appearances, Walker argued that Kavanaugh would comply with judicial precedents such as Roe v. Wade.[45]  In others, Walker argued that Kavanaugh was a solid conservative whose vote on conservative issues was beyond question.[46]  Furthermore, after the allegations by Dr. Blasey Ford were released, Walker argued that the allegations would have been investigated in July had they been deemed credible.[47]

FBI Independence

In July 2018, Walker authored an article criticizing calls for an independent FBI, arguing that similar to the military, civilian control of the FBI was necessary to prevent civil liberties violations.[48]  In the article, Walker chronicles the history of civilian control of the military and abuses committed by the FBI, noting that the agency engaged in “illegal and warrantless wiretaps, buggings, burglaries, destruction of files, and harassment of political minorities, the gay community, and African Americans.”[49]  In conclusion Walker argues: “…the FBI Director should not think of himself as the Nation’s Protector; instead, he must think of himself as an agent of the President.”[50] 

Political Reporting

Notably, as a college student, Walker spent two months crossing the country trailing Democratic presidential candidates during the 2004 election and writing missives from his experiences.[51]  In his posts, Walker discusses the state of the race, the relative merits of the candidates he covers, and his views on their ultimate match-up against President Bush.  For example, in one post, Walker describes an incident in which Rep. Dennis Kucinich visited a homeless man sleeping in a garage.[52]  In another, he suggests that Howard Dean “sabotaged his own campaign with a loose temper and a glib mouth.”[53] 

Interestingly, some of his posts display a broader critique of the Democratic Party rather than an “objective” look at the race.  For example, in one post describing the liberal town of Yellow Springs, Ohio, Walker calls it “a haven for hippies who never grew up,” sounding significantly older than his own 21 year old self.[54]  He notes that “every person is unusual” in the town.[55]  At the same time, Walker criticizes the town, stating that the town “lacks what liberals celebrate: tolerance, diversity, and change.”[56]

Similarly, in a 2002 article provocatively titled “Worthless Democrats”, Walker excoriates the party for not taking a position on the upcoming Iraq War, stating:

“[Democrats] are weak leaders who speak softly and carry a rubber stamp.  They neither agree with the president, nor oppose him.”[57]

Overall Assessment

When Walker was nominated to the District Court last year, we praised his “obvious intellect.” while noting his youth and lack of experience.  While his swift elevation over conservatives with exponentially more experience and expertise speaks to the power of his connections, it nonetheless raises an expected confirmation fight.

Specifically, Walker’s brief tenure as a district court judge can be mined by opponents to raise questions about his judicial temperament.  Walker’s writing is entertaining, but can come across as intemperate, particularly when considering the positions of litigants that Walker disagrees with.  More concerningly, Walker’s writing frequently glosses over key facts and precedent, and, as noted above, sometimes fails to engage with such precedent altogether.  For example, a casual reading of Walker’s opinion in On Fire may lead one to conclude that the judge cannot tell the difference between civil and criminal sanctions.  None of this is to suggest that the ultimate conclusions in Walker’s opinions are necessarily wrong or that they violate precedent.  Rather, the cursoriness of much of Walker’s legal analysis makes it difficult to evaluate the conclusions without conducting the analysis independently.

None of this is to say that Walker cannot grow into his position on the bench or be a great judge on the D.C. Circuit.  But, when Walker was first nominated, many suggested that he was being prematurely elevated while lacking the legal skills and experience to be a federal judge.  Walker’s tenure so far will not put those criticisms to rest.


[1] See Mark Joseph Stern, Trump Elevates Unqualified Judge As a Reward For Defending Kavanaugh, Slate, Apr. 3, 2020, https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/justin-walker-mcconnell-trump-dc-circuit.html.  

[2] Sen. Comm. on the Judiciary, 116th Cong., Justin Walker: Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees 1.

[3] See id. at 2.

[4] Id.

[5] Id. at 49-50.

[6] See Alison Durkee, Mitch McConnell Pressures Judges to Retire So Trump Can Appoint Replacements, Vanity Fair, Mar. 17, 2020, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03/mitch-mcconnell-pressures-judges-to-retire-trump.  

[7] See Letter from Katie O’Connor to Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan, Mar. 19, 2020 (available at https://h29zmgjkh3vbtzvz6gfub6meu.actbot.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/letter-to-DC-Circuit-re_-Thomas-Griffith-retirement.pdf?link_id=4&).

[8] See United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 561 U.S. 1025 (2010).

[9] See Walker, supra n. 1 at 32-33.

[10] Id. See also United States v. Todd, 3:17-cr-77 (W.D. Ky.).

[11] Matthew Glowicki, Judge Allows Drive-In Service at Louisville Church, Says Fischer ‘Criminalized’ Easter, Louisville Courier Journal, Apr. 11, 2020, https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2020/04/11/covid-19-kentucky-judge-grants-churchs-request-hold-services/2976560001/.  

[12] See On Fire Christian Cntr., Inc. v. Greg Fischer, et al., Civil Action No. 3:20-CV-264-JRW (W.D. Ky. Apr. 11, 2020) (available at https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.kywd.116558/gov.uscourts.kywd.116558.6.0.pdf).  

[13] See Josh Blackman, Courts Should Not Decide Issues That Are Not There, Volokh Conspiracy, Apr. 12, 2020, https://reason.com/2020/04/12/courts-should-not-decide-issues-that-are-not-there//.  

[14] See id. at 3.

[15] See id. at 7-8.

[16] See id. at 8.

[17] See Blackman, supra n. 13.

[18] See On Fire, supra n. 12 at 17.

[19] See id. at 6.

[20] Id.

[21] See id. at 2.

[22] See Blackman, supra n. 13.

[23] See id. at 10 n. 51, 17 n. 81.

[24] 805 F.3d 228 (6th Cir. 2015) (en banc) (holding that preventing plaintiffs from proselytizing violates their rights under the Free Exercise clause).

[25] 289 F.3d 417 (6th Cir. 2002) (holding that City development decisions that had disparate impact on church did not violate church’s Free Exercise rights).

[26] See United States v. Anderson, CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 3:19-CR-117-JRW-1, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8048 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 15, 2020).

[27] See id. at *2 (citing United States v. Brown, 828 F.3d 375, 384 (6th Cir. 2016).

[28] See id.

[29] Id.

[30] 828 F.3d 375 (6th Cir. 2016).

[31] Id. at 383.

[32] Notably, on this point, Walker cites Shakespeare’s King John rather than a precedent from the Sixth Circuit.

[33] United States v. Perkins, CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 3:19-CR-149-JRW, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53762 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 27, 2020).

[34] Id. at *3.

[35] Id.

[36] See id.

[37] Id. at *4 n. 10.

[38] See Martin & Bayley v. O’Bryan Brown & Toner PLLC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19902 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 31, 2020).

[39] Milburn v. Watts, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47737 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2020); Taj Graphics Enters. V. Sills, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52662 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 26, 2020)

[40] See Wirthwein v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-CV-335-JRW-CRL, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59128 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 3, 2020).

[41] Coffey v. Equian, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-CV-43-JRW, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56368 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 31, 2020).

[42] See id. at *4.

[43] Id.

[44] See, e.g., Sinay v. Lamson & Sessions Co., 948 F.2d 1037, 1041-42 (6th Cir. 1991) (citations omitted) (noting multiple grounds on which district court can deny leave to amend including “if the complaint as amended could not withstand a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion” and, separately, “where such leave is not sought.”).

[45] See, e.g., Fox News @ Night, July 17, 2018, Fox News Network.

[46] See Ryan Lovelace, Ex-Clerk to Kavanaugh: Potential Pick “Would Not Go Wobbly” on Conservatives, Nat’l Law Journal, June 29, 2018, https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/06/29/ex-clerk-to-kavanaugh-potential-pick-would-not-go-wobbly-on-conservatives/.  

[47] Evening Edit, Sept. 28, 2018.

[48] See Justin Walker, FBI Independence as a Threat to Civil Liberties: An Analogy to Civilian Control of the Military, 86 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1012 (July 2018).

[49] See id. at 1041.

[50] Id. at 1070.

[52] Justin Walker, Compassion for a Homeless Man, Justin Walker’s Campaign Diary, Jan. 10, 2004, https://today.duke.edu/showcase/mmedia/features/campaigndiary/campaign_compassion.html.  

[53] Justin Walker, Who Sabotaged Howard Dean’s Campaign, Feb. 4, 2004, https://today.duke.edu/showcase/mmedia/features/campaigndiary/campaign_deancamp.html.  

[54] Justin Walker, Closed-Minded Liberals, Feb. 18, 2004, https://today.duke.edu/showcase/mmedia/features/campaigndiary/campaign_yellowsprings.html.  

[55] Id.

[56] Id.

[57] Justin Walker, Worthless Democrats, The Duke Chronicle, Sept. 26, 2002, https://issuu.com/dukechronicleprintarchives/docs/the_chronicle_2002-09-26_sm.  

Judge Iain Johnston – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

The Dirksen Courthouse - where the Northern District of Illinois sits.

Judge Iain Johnston was already an experienced litigator when he was appointed as a U.S. Magistrate Judge in 2013.  His seven years on the bench since then have prepared him well for a judicial appointment.

Background

Iain David Johnston grew up in McHenry County, Illinois.[1]  Johnston graduated from Rockford College in 1987 and from the John Marshall Law School in 1990.  

After graduation, Johnston clerked for Judge Philip Reinhard on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  He then joined the Illinois Attorney General’s office under Attorney General Roland Burris, becoming the Unit Supervisor of the Civil Prosecutions Unit.[2]  Johnston became a Partner at Altheimer & Gray in 2002.[3]  In 2003, he moved to Holland & Knight in Chicago.  In 2008, Johnston founded the firm Johnston Green LLC.

In 2013, Johnston was appointed as a Magistrate Judge on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.[4]  He continues to serve on that Court.  

History of the Seat

Johnston has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  This seat opened on May 10, 2019, when Judge Frederick Kapala moved to senior status.  Johnston was nominated for the seat on February 12, 2020.

Legal Career

Johnston has diverse legal experience, going from working for the Illinois Attorney General to working in private practice.  In the former role, Johnston defended the State of Illinois against civil suits.  For example, Johnston defended against claims that the Illinois State Police single out and detain African American and Hispanic citizens disproportionately.[5]

In private practice, Johnston notably represented the City of Evanston against a suit alleging that the imposition of the City’s Demolition Tax violated the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.[6]  Johnston also represented a group of Illinois State Police officers who were sued after a team of prosecutors and police officers allegedly conspired to “frame two innocent men” for the murders of an Illinois couple.[7] 

Jurisprudence

Johnston has served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge since his appointment in 2013.  In this role, he presides over arraignments, bail hearings, and non-dispositive motions.  He also handles civil cases by consent of the parties.  In his seven years on the bench, Johnston has also presided over many substantive matters.  Most notably, Johnston presided over the lawsuit arising from the County of McHenry’s refusal to allow the Fraternite Notre Dame, Inc. to expand its winemaking, brewing, and commercial activities.[8]  The Fraternite, a Catholic religious order, sued under the U.S. and Illinois Constitutions and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”).  The parties ultimately settled in a consent order after Johnston found that the denial of the permit violated RLUIPA.[9]  In his decision approving the consent order, Johnston noted the anti-Catholic bigotry directed against the order by local residents, noting that the Order faced vandalism and the threats of lynching.[10]

Writings

Over his career, Johnston has occasionally authored articles discussing the law.  For example, in an article he wrote as an Assistant Attorney General, Johnston discusses the failure of many attorneys to comply with the Local Rules of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois regarding summary judgment briefing and suggests how to comply with the Rules’ requirements.[11]  In another article written as a U.S. Magistrate Judge, Johnston discusses the depositions of “apex witnesses” or witnesses who claim that they are “too important” to be deposed in civil cases.[12]

Political Activity

Johnston has a limited political history, with only one political contribution to the campaign of Gery Chico, a Democrat running for U.S. Senate.[13]

Overall Assessment

With the exception of some who may be concerned with his defense of municipalities and officers charged with civil rights violations, there will be few who object to Johnston’s qualifications for the federal bench.  As such, one can predict a comfortable confirmation.


[1] Press Release, Office of Northern Illinois Federal District Court Chief Judge James Holderman, McHenry-Raised Iain Johnston Appointed Federal Magistrate in Rockford to Replace P. Michael Mahoney, Feb. 1, 2013.

[2] Id. 

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] See Chavez v. Ill. State Police, 27 F.Supp.2d 1053 (N.D. Ill. 1998).

[6] Kathrein v. City of Evanston, 636 F.3d 906 (7th Cir. 2011).

[7] See Whitlock v. Brueggemann, 682 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2012).

[8] See Fraternite Notre Dame, Inc. v. Cty. of McHenry, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40030 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 2, 2020).

[9] Drew Zimmerman, Religious Order Expansion Can Go Forward in Marengo, Chicago Daily Herald, Mar. 10, 2020.

[10] See Fraternite Notre Dame, supra n. 10 at *6-7.

[11] Iain D. Johnston, Summary Judgment Motions in the Northern District: The Importance of Local Rules 12M & 12N, 12 CBA Record 24 (April 1998).

[12] See Hon. Iain D. Johnston, Apex Witnesses Claim They Are Too Big to Depose, 41 Litigation 41 (Fall 2014).

Judge Stephen McGlynn – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois

Judge Stephen McGlynn has had a varied career, including losing his seat on the state bench twice.  Now, he has been nominated by the Trump Administration for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois with the support of U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth.

Background

Stephen Patrick McGlynn was born in 1962.  McGlynn received a B.A. from the University of Dayton in 1984 and his J.D. from St. Louis University School of Law in 1987.

After graduation, McGlynn worked in private practice at McGlynn & McGlynn in Belleville, Illinois.  Additionally, from 1996 to 2005, McGlynn was also designated as a Special Assistant Attorney General in Illinois.  In 2006, upon the recommendation of Illinois Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier (on whose campaign McGlynn worked), McGlynn was appointed to the Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court.[1]  However, McGlynn was ousted from his seat in 2006 by Democrat Bruce Stewart.[2] 

After his election loss, McGlynn returned to McGlynn & McGlynn.  However, in 2010, Karmeier again appointed McGlynn to the state bench, this time to the Illinois 20th Judicial Circuit Court.[3]  However, McGlynn was, again, ousted by voters in 2012, this time in favor of Democrat Judy Cates.[4] 

Not to be deterred, Karmeier again appointed McGlynn to the 20th Judicial Circuit Court in 2013.[5]  This time, Karmeier won election in 2014 and has served on the court ever since.

History of the Seat

McGlynn has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.  This seat opened on March 31, 2019, when Judge Michael Reagan moved to senior status.

Legal Career

While McGlynn has a broad level of legal experience, he is particularly notable for his work in election and municipal law, and for representing local officials and Republican Party officials.  For example, McGlynn represented Centreville Mayor Riley Owens, who was charged with assault for telling an Alderman that the mayor would “blow your head off.”[6]

Interestingly, McGlynn’s close relationship to Republican officials came up in a federal corruption investigation against Gov. George Ryan.[7]  Documents uncovered by prosecutors showed that McGlynn was among several Republican officials who requested “favors” from Ryan while he served as Illinois’ Secretary of State.[8]  Specifically, McGlynn had requested a summer job for a local high school student.[9]  However, no wrongdoing was alleged or charged on McGlynn’s part.

In other matters, McGlynn represented the family members of a man who was run over by a police cruiser.[10]  After a grand jury failed to return an indictment against the police officer who operated the cruiser, McGlynn complained about the lack of justice for individuals who were “brutalized here without cause by police.”[11]

Jurisprudence

McGlynn has had three stints as a state court judge.  From 2005 to 2006, McGlynn was an appellate judge for the Fifth District Appellate Court.  From 2011 to 2012 and since 2013, McGlynn was a judge on the Illinois 20th Judicial Circuit Court.  McGlynn’s first two stints as judge ended with election losses, whereas the third continues to the present.  During that first loss, McGlynn was not recommended for the judgeship by the Illinois State Bar Association.[12]  Given his varied appointments, McGlynn has experience on both trial and appellate courts.

Among the more notable cases that McGlynn has handled, he issued a temporary restraining order preventing Caseyville Mayor Leonard Black from firing Police Chief Jose Alvarez.[13]  McGlynn’s ruling found that Black had violated Alvarez’s contract as well as his right to due process.[14]  In another case, McGlynn granted a demolition permit to the City of East St. Louis, which was seeking to raze the Murphy Building in its historic downtown.[15]

Political Activity

McGlynn has an extensive political history, including having served as the GOP Chairman of St. Clair County and as the Vice Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party.[16]  Notably, McGlynn was instrumental in recruiting Alan Keyes to challenge then-state senator Barack Obama in running for the U.S. Senate in 2004.[17]  Keyes, however, lost badly, getting only 30% of the vote after a series of controversial statements, including describing same-sex relationships as “selfish hedonism.”[18]  McGlynn was also active in the campaign of Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier, who would later promote McGlynn to judgeships three times.[19]

Overall Assessment

Ordinarily, the fact that a nominee has the support of their Democratic home-state senators is enough for me to designate them a consensus nominee.  However, in McGlynn’s case, it’s a little more complicated.

McGlynn’s long partisan history and his close connection with Karmeier, whose ethics have been called into question,[20] may also raise concerns.  Critics may focus on the fact that McGlynn has twice been voted out of office as a judge only to be reappointed to judgeships by Karmeier.  Republicans may also object to McGlynn’s comments on police brutality.

That being said, McGlynn’s jurisprudence does not reflect a partisan bias. As such, as long as Durbin and Duckworth remain on board, critics may choose to focus their fire on more appealing targets.


[1] Paul Hampel, Karmeier Taps 2 From GOP for Appeals Court: He Had Pledged to Be Nonpartisan, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, June 9, 2005.

[2] Id.

[3] Belleville News-Democrat, McGlynn Tapped as New Judge in Southwestern Ill., A.P. State & Local Wire, Sept. 2, 2010.

[4] See Bill Grimes, Republicans Dominate Local Election, Effingham Daily News, Nov. 8, 2012.

[5] Press Release, Illinois Supreme Court, Illinois Supreme Court Appoints Stephen McGlynn as Circuit Judge in 20th Judicial Circuit, June 19, 2013.

[6] See Robert Goodrich, Centreville Mayor is Acquitted of Assault; He Was Accused in Dispute with Alderman at City Hall; 2nd Alderman Backs Mayor’s Story, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 4, 1999.

[7] See Kevin McDermott, Metro East Officials Defend Seeking Favors From Ryan, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 1, 2003.

[8] See id.

[9] See id.

[10] Paul Hampel, Protesters Express Outrage that Policeman Who Ran Over Fleeing Suspect Wasn’t Indicted; Madison County Grand Jury Ruled Death An Accident, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 8, 2003.

[11] Id.

[12] Paul Hampel and William Lamb, 3 GOP Judges are Panned in Poll, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 23, 2006.

[13] Judge Intervenes in Mayor’s Firing of Police Chief, A.P. State & Local Wire, Mar. 6, 2014.

[14] See id. 

[15] See Paul Hampel, Judge Won’t Stop Demolition of Historic East St. Louis Building; Owner Vows to Fight On, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 15, 2015.

[16] See Patrick E. Gauen, St. Clair County Politics Goes From Hardball to Worse, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 29, 1996.  See also Norm Parish, Illinois Republicans Aim to Draw Black Voters; Co-Leader of State Party Plans Major Recruitment Drive; Says Message is Attractive, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Dec. 9, 2002.

[17] See Alex Pasternack, Keyes Enters Illinois Senate Race Against Democrat Obama, N.Y. Sun, Aug. 9, 2004.

[18] A.P., Keyes: Cheney’s Gay Daughter Practicing ‘Selfish Hedonism’, NBCNews.com, Sept. 2, 2004, http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5897569#.XoaZudNKiCQ.

[19] See Hampel, supra n. 1.

[20] Billy Corriher and Brent DeBeaumont, Dodging a Billion Dollar Verdict, Center for American Progress, Aug. 14, 2013, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/courts/reports/2013/08/14/72199/dodging-a-billion-dollar-verdict/. 

Judge Franklin Valderrama – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

The Dirksen Courthouse - where the Northern District of Illinois sits.

Judge Franklin Valderrama’s thirteen year tenure on the Cook County Circuit Court has put him in the center of a number of politically charged cases.  As such, if confirmed, Valderrama would certainly be prepared for the pressure that comes with being a federal judge.

Background

Franklin Ulyses Valderrama’s family is originally from Panama.[1]  Valderrama received a B.A. from the University of Illinois in 1985 and a J.D. from DePaul University College of Law in 1988.  

After graduation, Valderrama worked at Sanchez, Daniels, & Hoffman LLP in Chicago, where he became a Partner.[2]  Valderrama was appointed to the Circuit Court of Cook County in 2007 and has served on the court ever since.

History of the Seat

Valderrama has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  This seat opened on September 27, 2019, when Judge Ruben Castillo moved to senior status.  Valderrama was nominated for the seat on February 12, 2020.

Legal Career

Valderrama’s legal career before he became a judge was at the firm of Sanchez, Daniels & Hoffman LLP.  At the firm, Valderrama largely focused on trial level litigation.[3]  Among his more notable cases, Valderrama represented Simon Management, who managed a strip mall, in a suit seeking liability for the death of a loss prevention specialist who was shot by a shoplifter.[4]  In the case, a jury found Simon Management partially responsible for the death of the loss prevention specialist.[5]  However, an appellate court reversed the verdict, finding that Simon Management could not be held responsible for the death of the plaintiff because there was no allegation that any negligence by security was involved in the specialist’s death.[6]

Jurisprudence

Valderrama has served as a judge on the Circuit Court of Cook County since 2007, the Circuit Court being the primary state trial court in Chicago.  In this role, Valderrama has presided over a number of high-profile cases.  

Most notably, Valderrama presided over the lawsuit arising from the police shooting of African American teenager Laquan McDonald.[7]  After a quick settlement in the case, a freelance journalist filed a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request seeking the release of dash and body cam footage of the shooting.[8]  Valderrama ruled against the City and ordered the release of the footage, which the City reluctantly agreed to.[9]  Despite predictions of violence, protests following the release of the footage were largely peaceful.[10]

Among other notable decisions, Valderrama dismissed a lawsuit brought by gun control groups seeking to shut down gun shops in Chicago neighborhoods,[11] and dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Chicago Public School System challenging the state’s school funding formula as discriminatory.[12] 

Valderrama has also had to deal with aggressive lawyers in his courtroom.  In one case, Valderrama strongly admonished attorney Charles Andrew Cohn for using offensive language in reference to his opposing counsel during a deposition.[13]  Cohn attempted to justify his language and conduct by claiming that “a man who insults on a daily basis everybody he does business with has now been elected President of the United States” and that, thus, “I can say what I want.”[14]  Expectedly, Valderrama did not find this defense very persuasive and admonished Cohn in his language, only for Cohn to accuse the judge of “robe rage.”[15]  Cohn ultimately faced an ethics complaint due to his conduct.[16]

Overall Assessment

Judge Valderrama’s thirteen year tenure on the state bench paints the picture of a no-nonsense jurist who can handle tough issues and confrontational attorneys.  As he has recieeved the stamp of approval from the Trump Administration and Illinois’ Democratic senators, Valderrama is poised for a comfortable confirmation.


[1] See Betsy Wangesteen, Man, Oh Manny: Meet Chicago’s Uberschmoozer: ‘Stalking’ Dick Notebaert and Other Adventures with Solicitor Sanchez, Crain’s Chicago Business, June 9, 1997.

[2] Id. 

[3] See Press Release, Office of President Donald J. Trump, President Donald J. Trump Announces Judicial Nominee, Feb. 5, 2020 (available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-announces-judicial-nominee-3/).

[4] See Kolodziejzak v. Melvin Simon & Assocs., 685 N.E.2d 985 (Ill. App. 1997).

[5] See id. at 987.

[6] Id. at 991.

[7] See John Kass, The Video That Will Rip Chicago Apart, Right Wing News, Nov. 12, 2015.

[8] See id.

[9] Don Babwin, Chicago Says It’ll Release Shooting Video Per Judge’s Order, A.P. Online, Nov. 10, 2015.

[10] Monica Davey and Mitch Smith, Chicago Protests Mostly Peaceful After Video of Police Shooting is Released, N.Y. Times, Nov. 24, 2015.

[11] See Dean Weingarten, Lawsuit Against Cities Near Chicago, for Black Crime in Chicago is Struck Down, Ammoland.com, Mar. 15, 2016.

[12] Mike Kennedy, Judge Rejects Chicago School System’s Funding Lawsuit; District May Have to End School Year 3 Weeks Early, Am. Sch. & Univ., Apr. 28, 2017.

[13] See Debra Cassens Weiss, Lawyer Accuses Judge of ‘Robe Rage,’ Tells Opposing Counsel to ‘Certify Your Own Stupidity,’ Ethics Complaint Says, ABA Journal, Dec. 20, 2018, https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyer-accused-judge-of-robe-rage-told-opposing-counsel-to-certify-her-stupidity-ethics-charges-say.

[14] See id.

[15] See id.

[16] Id.

Judge David Dugan – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois

Judge David Dugan is the epitome of a consensus nominee: a judge with extensive litigation experience and the support of the Republican Administration and his Democratic home-state senators.

Background

David W. Dugan was born in 1960.  Dugan received a B.A. in Political Science from Eastern Illinois University in 1982 and his J.D. from Valparaiso University School of Law in 1985.[1]  After law school, Dugan entered private practice, focusing on personal injury and commercial litigation, as well as working as a part-time assistant state’s attorney.[2]

In 2017, Dugan was appointed by Illinois Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier to the Third Judicial Circuit.[3]  Dugan has served on the court ever since.

History of the Seat

Dugan has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.  This seat opened on January 7, 2019, when Judge David Herndon moved to senior status.  Dugan was nominated on February 12, 2020.

Legal Career

Dugan has practiced in civil and commercial litigation between 1986 and 2016.  In his thirty years of legal practice, Dugan has practiced in both state and federal courts, in particular in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

Among the various cases that Dugan had handled, he represented plaintiffs seeking recovery for injuries from automobile accidents,[4]  prisoners seeking release under habeas review,[5]  and a plaintiff seeking to return an action that was “removed” to federal court back into state court.[6] 

Jurisprudence 

Dugan has served as an Illinois Circuit Court judge since his appointment in 2017.  In this role, Dugan serves on a court of general jurisdiction, reviewing civil and criminal cases, as well as habeas corpus and mandamus writs.  Among the cases he handled, Dugan reviewed a number of decisions of the Illinois Worker’s Compensation Commission,[7] as well as claims against the state government.[8]  Dugan’s decisions have generally been affirmed by higher courts.

Political Activity

Dugan has frequently donated to political candidates, mostly giving to Republicans, but with a handful of contributions to Democrats as well, most notably to then-Senate candidate Barack Obama in 2004.[9]

Overall Assessment

As noted earlier, Dugan has an uncontroversial record, decades of legal experience, and bipartisan support.  He will likely be confirmed near unanimously later this year.


[1] Staff Report, David W. Dugan Appointed as Circuit Judge for Third Judicial Circuit, The Telegraph, Feb. 12, 2017, https://www.thetelegraph.com/news/article/David-W-Dugan-appointed-as-circuit-judge-for-12589912.php.

[2] See id.

[3] Id.

[4] See, e.g., Lynch v. Switalski, 2003 WL 262519 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 5, 2003).

[5] See e.g., Gines v. Mote, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33082 (S.D. Ill. Mar. 25, 2004).

[6] See Loellke v. Moore, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9313 (S.D. Ill. Jan. 26, 2012).

[7] See, e.g., Rednour v. Ill. Workers’ Comp. Comm’n, 2018 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1758 (Ill. App. Oct. 2, 2018).

[8] See, e.g., Grater v. Court of Claims, 2019 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1425 (Ill. App. Jul. 25, 2019).

Christy Wiegand – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

Nineteen years ago, Christy Wiegand, then a young attorney at Arnold & Porter, was attacked while jogging in Rock Creek Park.  Wiegand fought back against her attacker, escaped, and later identified him to the police.  She went on to a distinguished career as a federal prosecutor, and now is primed for a seat on the federal bench.

Background

Christy Wiegand attended Princeton University, where she was a varsity rower, and went onto Cornell Law School, receiving her J.D. in 2000.[1]  After law school, Wiegand moved to Washington D.C. to join Arnold & Porter in their antitrust practice.  

However, in her first year in D.C., while jogging with her then-fiance in Rock Creek Park, Wiegand was attacked by a knife-wielding man.[2]  She managed to fight back and escaped to contact the police, who arrested her attacker, 19-year-old Ingmar Guandique.[3]  Guandique was later implicated in the murder of Chandra Levy, a Congressional intern whose disappearance had drawn suspicions on her boss, Congressman Gary Condit.[4]  Wiegand would also testify against Guandique who was ultimately convicted.[5]

In 2003, Wiegand left Arnold & Porter to clerk for Judge D. Brooks Smith on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.  Since her clerkship, Wiegand has served as a federal prosecutor for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

History of the Seat

The seat Wiegand has been nominated for opened on July 22, 2019, when Judge Peter Phipps, himself a Trump appointee, was elevated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.  Wiegand was nominated on February 12, 2020.

Legal Experience

Wiegand has practiced law as an Associate at Arnold & Porter and as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Pennsylvania.  In the former position, Wiegand focused on antitrust law.[6] In the latter position, Wiegand has handled both civil and criminal matters, including serving as the Deputy Civil Chief.[7] 

Among the most notable cases Wiegand handled, she was part of a legal team suing Education Management Corp. (EDMC), a for-profit education conglomerate that was charged with violating federal laws.[8]  Wiegand also led prosecutions against the Darccide/Smash 44 Gang for narcotics, firearms, and organized crime violations.[9]

Political Activity

Wiegand has only one political contribution of record, a 2016 contribution of $1000 to Sen. Patrick Toomey (R-PA).[10] 

Overall Assessment

Having powered through far more significant obstacles and barriers, Wiegand should be able to navigate the Senate confirmation process relatively comfortably.  Given her relatively uncontroversial record and her support from both Toomey and Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA), Wiegand can expect a bipartisan confirmation.


[1] See Sari Horwitz, Scott Higham, and Sylvia Moreno, Chapter Six: The Predator in the Park, Wash. Post, July 17, 2008.

[2] See id.

[3] Id.

[4] Matthew Barakat, Chandra Levy’s Father Testifies About Efforts to Find Daughter, Other Testimony, San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 26, 2010.

[5] See Matthew Barakat, Woman Testifies About Attack at Chandra Levy Trial, San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 26, 2010.  See also Michael Doyle, Jury Finds Guandique Guilty of Killing Chandra Levy, Canwest News Service, Nov. 22, 2010.

[6] See Press Release, Office of Sen. Patrick Toomey, Toomey, Casey Applaud Nomination of Christy Wiegand to U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania, Feb. 5, 2020 (available at https://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=op_ed&id=2567).  

[7] See id.

[8] See Press Release, Office of the Attorney General, For-Profit College Company to Pay $95.5 Million to Settle Claims of Illegal Recruiting, Consumer Fraud, and Other Violations, Nov. 16, 2015.

[9] See Press Release, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Pennsylvania, First of 37 Defendants Charged in Darccide/Smash 44 Gang Investigation Pleads Guilty to Drug Charge, Dec. 6, 2019.