Judge Leon Schydlower – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas

El Paso based Magistrate Judge Leon Schydlower should be a safe choice to join the short-staffed Western District of District.

Background

Schydlower received a B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin in 1993 and a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 1995. He subsequently worked with the Judge Advocate General Corps in the U.S. Navy for two years and then joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Hawaii as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney.

In 2000, Schydlower moved to El Paso to work for the Kemp Smith law firm and shifted to being a solo practitioner two years later. At the same time, Schydlower continued to work with the U.S. Navy Reserve and then with the U.S. Air Force Reserve Judge Advocate Corps.

In 2015, Schydlower was appointed as a U.S. Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Texas, where he currently works.

History of the Seat

Schydlower has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. This seat opened on February 26, 2021, when Judge Philip Ray Martinez passed away.

Legal Experience

Schydlower started his legal career with the U.S. Navy JAG Corps, and moved on to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Hawaii, where he prosecuted various offenses, including the theft of government property. See United States v. Chon, 210 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2000).

In 2000, Schydlower moved to El Paso and worked in private practice. Schydlower’s civil practice included medical malpractice cases, see, e.g., In re Navar, 143 S.W.3d 869 (Tex. App. 8th Dist. 2004), as well as federal habeas cases. See Berkley v. Quarterman, 507 F. Supp. 2d 692 (W.D. Tex. 2007). Schydlower has also represented plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases. See, e.g., Mitchell v. Zia Park, LLC, 842 F. Supp. 2d 1316 (D.N.M. 2012).

Among his more notable cases, Schydlower represented Maria Castillo, whose medical malpractice claims were dismissed by the trial court for failure to provide an adequate expert report, which was affirmed by the court of appeals. See Castillo v. August, 248 S.W.3d 874 (Tex. App. 8th Dist. 2008). Schydlower also represented Christopher Houseman, an immigration agent, who sued a Mexican publishing company for publishing his photo alongside an article about an immigration agent who had been arrested for involvement in narcotrafficking. See Houseman v. Publicaciones Paso del Norte, 242 S.W.3d 518 (Tex. App. 8th Dist. 2007). The defamation claim was dismissed, with a finding that a reasonable listener would be unlikely have been mislead by the photo and caption. See id.

On the criminal side, Schydlower represented defendants in both Texas and New Mexico, taking court appointed cases. See, e.g., United States v. Quaintance, 471 F. Supp. 2d 1153 (D.N.M. 2006). Schydlower also handled a number of criminal appeals before the Fifth and Tenth Circuits. See, e.g., United States v. Montano, 472 F.3d 1202 (10th Cir. 2007).

Jurisprudence

Schydlower has served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge since 2015. In this capacity, Schydlower presided over the pretrial aspects and discovery stages of cases, and prepared reports and recommendations for district judges. He also presided over cases by consent. Among the more prominent cases where Schydlower prepared a Report and Recommendation, he recommended that Judge David Guaderrama deny a motion for summary judgment brought by police officers sued for unlawful entry into the home of the plaintiff. See ER v. Jasso, 573 F. Supp. 3d 1117 (W.D. Tex. 2021). While the officers alleged that their actions were protected by qualified immunity, Schydlower rejected those claims, and Guaderrama agreed, denying summary judgment on those claims. See id.

Political Activity

Schydlower has a relatively limited political donation history, which includes donations to State Rep. Joseph Moody, and Rep. Silvestre Reyes, both Democrats.

Overall Assessment

As a judge with a plaintiff-friendly background who nonetheless has won the support of his home state senators, Schydlower should be seen as a consensus nominee and should be comfortably confirmed.

103 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Kelly Rankin – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming

A Wyoming native with extensive ties to the legal community, Judge Kelly Rankin has been nominated to a lifetime appointment on the federal bench.

Background

Born in 1968, Kelly H. Rankin received a B.S. from the University of Wyoming in 1990 and a J.D. from the University of Wyoming College of Law in 1994. Rankin then spent a year at the Lincoln County Attorney’s Office before shifting to the Park County Attorney’s Office. In 1999, Rankin became the Park County Attorney.

In 2003, Rankin became a federal prosecutor under U.S. Attorney Matt Mead. In 2008, Rankin was appointed to replace Mead by President George W. Bush as U.S. Attorney, which he held until 2010, when President Obama replaced him with Christopher Crofts. Rankin then briefly served as Counsel to Democratic Governor Dave Freudenthal (himself a former Wyoming U.S. Attorney) before returning to the U.S. Attorney’s Office as Criminal Chief.

In 2012, Rankin was appointed as a U.S. Magistrate Judge in Wyoming, where he currently serves.

History of the Seat

Rankin has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming to replace Judge Nancy Freudenthal, who took senior status on June 1, 2022.

Legal Experience

While Rankin started his legal career as a prosecutor in a number of County Attorney’s offices, his name first appears in notable cases as a law student, when Rankin assisted the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office in opposing an appeal from a defendant charged with forgery and check fraud. See Black v. State, 869 P.2d 1137 (Wyo. 1994).

In 2003, Rankin became an Assistant U.S. Attorney with the District of Wyoming, in which role he prosecuted a variety of offenses, and argued before the Tenth Circuit as well. See United States v. Magallanez, 408 F.3d 672 (10th Cir. 2005). In 2008, at the age of forty, Rankin was nominated by President George W. Bush to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Wyoming and was confirmed by the Senate. As U.S. Attorney, Rankin supervised and directed all federal prosecutions for the District, including working with future Tenth Circuit Judge Gregory Phillips, when the latter was a federal prosecutor. See, e.g., United States v. Dennis, 551 F.3d 986 (10th Cir. 2008). Rankin also served as counsel of record on certain appeals before the Tenth Circuit. See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 556 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2009).

Subsequently, Rankin spent a short stint as a legal advisor to Gov. Dave Freudenthal before returning to the U.S. Attorney’s Office as Chief of the Criminal Section.

Jurisprudence

Since 2012, Rankin has been a U.S. Magistrate Judge with the District of Wyoming. In this role, Rankin presides over cases where parties consent to his jurisdiction, presides over pretrial release and discovery issues, and writes reports and recommendations for district judges to approve. Among the cases where the parties consented to Rankin presiding, while sitting by designation in Colorado, he presided over litigation brought by a Sheriff in Park County who claims that he was demoted for criticizing the conduct of other Deputies who had engaged in a civil eviction that ended in the deaths of two individuals. See Tonjes v. Park Cnty. Sheriff’s Office, 300 F. Supp. 3d 1308 (D. Colo. 2018). Rankin denied motions to dismiss most of the claims brought by the plaintiff, finding that they had been plausibly alleged. See id. at 1332-33.

Among other notable opinions Rankin has authored, he denied a motion from Casper City Councilman Craig Hedquist’s to compel production of documents between the City Council and attorneys and other individuals related to an effort to remove Hedquist, finding that the documents were protected under the attorney-client privilege. See Hedquist v. Patterson, 215 F. Supp. 3d 1237 (Wyo. 2016).

Political Activity

While Rankin has worked for both Republicans and Democrats in his career, his donation history is entirely Republican, including donations to Mead, Sen. Mike Enzi, and the Wyoming Republican Party.

Overall Assessment

With the support of the White House, his home state senators, and extensive experience with the Wyoming legal community, Rankin represents a fairly consensus nominee and should be confirmed comfortably.

210 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah

Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen would be, if confirmed, the only judge from Southern Utah on the federal district court.

Background

The daughter of former Republican State Representative Kay McIff and a Southern Utah native, Ann Marie McIff Allen received a B.A. from Brigham Young University in 1994 and a J.D. from Brigham Young University’s J. Reuben Clark Law School in 1997. Allen then went into private practice until 2007 when she became Deputy County Attorney for the Iron County Attorney’s Office. In 2013, she returned to private practice as a solo practitioner, although she also worked with Southern Utah University as Special Counsel and then General Counsel.

In 2020, Allen was appointed to be a judge on Utah’s Fifth District Court, where she has served since.

History of the Seat

Allen has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah to replace Judge David Nuffer, who took senior status on April 2, 2022. Allen was recommended for the vacancy by Sen. Mitt Romney.

Legal Experience

Allen worked in private practice at a number of different firms between 1997 and 2007 and then again between 2013 and 2020, focusing on civil practice. Between 2007 and 2013, by contrast, Allen worked for the Iron County Attorney’s Office, working both as a prosecutor and a public defender (County Attorneys in Utah have broad roles, including serving as a legal advisor, prosecution, and indigent defense).

Between 2017 and 2020, Allen worked as Counsel for Southern Utah University, where she served as a legal advisor to the University on Title IX compliance and other issues.

Jurisprudence

Allen has served as a judge on the Fifth District Court in Southern Utah since Governor Gary Herbert appointed her to the court in 2020. In Utah, District Courts are trial courts of general jurisdiction, which preside over all civil cases and all criminal felonies.

Among the notable cases Allen handled as a judge, Allen presided over a jury trial that found Darcy Anderson to be guilty of three felony counts relating to the sexual abuse of a ten year old victim. See Jeff Richards, Jury Finds Parowan Man Guilty of Sexually Abusing 10-Year-Old Girl in His Home, St. George News, Feb. 25, 2022, https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2022/02/25/jmr-jury-finds-parowan-man-guilty-of-sexually-abusing-10-year-old-girl-in-his-home/. Allen also found Jacob Schmidt, accused of running another man over with a car, to be competent to stand trial. See Jeff Richards, Cedar City Man Accused of Murder in Fatal Hit-and-Run Found Competent to Stand Trial, St. George News, Feb. 24, 2021, https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2021/02/24/jmr-cedar-city-man-accused-of-murder-in-fatal-hit-and-run-found-competent-to-stand-trial/.

Additionally, Allen was one of a group of judges who was sued in federal court by defendants who were challenging the bails set in their cases. See Medina v. Allen, Case No. 4:21-cv-00102-DN-PK (D. Utah Mar. 30, 2023); see also Jessica Miller, Lawsuit Challenges Utah’s Cash-Based Bail System, The Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 4, 2021, https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/10/04/these-utahns-are-too-poor/. The suit was dismissed by Nuffer. See id.

Overall Assessment

The District of Utah has a Salt Lake City focused bench, with the lone Southern Utah judge, Nuffer, having moved there in 2018 when the court opened a new division in Southern Utah. Allen, by contrast, has deep ties to Southern Utah, which would serve her well in building the legal community around the new division.

As for her background, Allen may draw questions about the lawsuit challenging her bail decisions, given that it was supported by a number of progressive organizations, but is nonetheless favored to be confirmed.

300 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Susan Bazis – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska

U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan Bazis may have been passed over for a seat on the Nebraska Supreme Court in 2015, but she is now poised to take a seat on the federal bench.

Background

Born in 1968, Susan M. Bazis attended the University of Nebraska at Omaha and then Creighton University School of Law, getting her B.S. magna cum laude in 1990 and her J.D. in 1993. During law school, Bazis worked at Paragas Law Offices and continued with the firm upon graduation. Bazis also spent three years as an Assistant Public Defender while with the office.

In 2001, Bazis became a solo practitioner, which she maintained until 2007 when Govenor Dave Heineman appointed Bazis to the Douglas County Court.

In 2015, Bazis applied to replace Justice Michael McCormick on the Nebraska Supreme Court, but Sarpy County Judge Max Kelch was chosen for the seat instead.

Around the same time that she thwarted a car theft in 2017, Bazis left the state court bench when Judge Laurie Smith Camp appointed her as a federal magistrate judge, where she currently serves.

History of the Seat

Bazis has been nominated for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. This seat opened on February 6, 2023 when Judge John Gerrard took senior status. In early 2023, Sen. Deb Fischer recommended Bazis to the White House for nomination, and Bazis’ nomination was announced on December 19, 2023.

Legal Experience

Bazis started her legal career at Paragas Law Offices, while also having a short stint as a Public Defender in Douglas County. She then spent seven years as a solo practitioner in Omaha, during which time she handled a wide variety of cases including criminal defense and family law. Notably, Bazis has represented death penalty cases in challenges to their sentence. See, e.g., State v. Gales, 269 Neb. 443 (2005). Bazis also argued before the Nebraska Supreme Court on behalf of Edward Robinson, convicted of murder for a fatal shooting after a fight in the Popeye’s parking lot. See State v. Robinson, 724 N.W.2d 35 (Neb. 2006).

Among the family law cases that Bazis handled, she represented a father before the Nebraska Court of Appeals, who sought to have an order terminating his parental rights overturned. See In re Dylan Z., 697 N.W.2d 707 (Neb. App. 2005). The Court of Appeals reversed the termination of parental rights on the grounds of abandonment and neglect, finding that the appellant’s lack of presence in his son’s life was based on his lack of knowledge of the son’s birth, and not on a wilful abandonment. See id. at 719.

Jurisprudence

Bazis has been on the bench for the last sixteen years, starting as a state court judge and then moving on to be a U.S. Magistrate Judge.

State Court

Bazis served on the Douglas County Circuit Court between her appointment in 2007 and her appointment as a magistrate judge in 2017. During this time, Bazis also served as the court’s presiding judge for four years, and also served as an advocate to reform the state’s guardianship system. See Bill Kelly, Guardianship Reform Advances After Judges, Victims Share Concerns, Nebraska Public Media, Feb. 13, 2014, https://nebraskapublicmedia.org/en/news/news-articles/guardianship-reform-advances-after-judges-victims-share-concerns/. Additionally, during her time as a state court judge, she reported her colleague Gregory Schatz to the Judicial Misconduct Commission for improperly contacting the local jail to release one of his friends on a personal recognizance bond. See In re Complaint Against Schatz, 845 N.W.2d 273 (Neb. 2014).

Federal Court

Since 2017, Bazis has served as a federal magistrate judge, in which role, she prepares reports and recommendations for district judges, handles discovery disputes and pretrial litigation, and presides over cases by the agreement of the parties. Among the reports and recommendations that she prepared, Bazis presided over an evidentiary hearing sought by Tracy Inman, who alleged that her counsel failed to file an appeal on her behalf, and ruled that Inman had not directed her counsel to file an appeal. See United States v. Inman, No. 8:21-CR-60 (D. Neb. Nov. 20, 2023) (Buescher, J.). Judge Brian Buescher accepted Bazis’ recommendation in denying Inman’s petition for relief.

Among the matters she has presided over, Bazis ruled that an Administrative Judge had a substantial basis to find that Amber Kraus was not disabled and thus was not entitled to disability benefits. See Kraus v. Saul, 988 F.3d 1019 (8th Cir. 2021). The Eighth Circuit affirmed Bazis’ ruling. See id.

Political Activity

Bazis has a handful of political contributions, including to the Nebraska Republican Party, Heineman and Congressman Lee Terry.

Overall Assessment

As a nominee, Bazis has extensive experience with both state and federal court, as well as the support of her home state senators. Given her close ties to Nebraska Republicans, it is unlikely that her nomination will prove controversial.

59 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Robin Meriweather – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims

U.S. Magistrate Judge Robin Meriweather, who has served on the federal bench in D.C. for the past six years has been nominated to a seat on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

Background

Meriweather received a B.A. from the University of Michigan in 1995, and her J.D. from Yale Law School in 1998. After graduation, Meriweather clerked for Judge Merrick Garland on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and subsequently joined Jenner & Block as an Associate.

In 2007, Meriweather joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia where she stayed until appointed as a U.S. Magistrate Judge in 2017.

History of the Seat

Meriweather has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (CFC), an Article I court that hears monetary claims against the federal government. Judges to the CFC are appointed for 15-year terms, and can be reappointed. The seat Meriweather was nominated for opened up on September 30, 2023 with the retirement of Judge Patricia Campbell-Smith.

Legal Experience

Meriweather started her legal career at the firm of Jenner and Block, where she worked on a number of communications cases. See, e.g., Consumer Electronics Ass. v. Fed. Communications Comm’n, 347 F.3d 291 (D.C. Cir. 2003); Verizon Pennsylvania v. Pennsylvania Pub. Utility, 380 F. Supp. 2d 627 (E.D. Penn. 2005). Notably, she was appointed as an amicus on behalf of a former D.C. employee on a disability discrimination case. See Smith v. Dist. of Columbia, 430 F.3d (D.C. Cir. 2005). The D.C. Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment against the plaintiff on the discrimination claim and remanded for trial. See id.

From 2007 to 2017, Meriweather worked at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. At the office, Meriweather worked in the Civil Division at the U.S. Attorney’s Office, defending claims brought against the federal government. See, e.g., Boardley v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 615 F.3d 508 (D.C. Cir. 2010). Notably, Meriweather argued before the D.C. Circuit on a suit arising from the termination of a contract with Voice of America after a contractor appeared in a music video criticizing the U.S. involvement in Iraq. See Navab-Safavi v. Glassman, 637 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir. 2011).

Judicial Experience

Meriweather has served as a U.S. Magistrate Judge for the District of Columbia since her appointment in 2017. As Magistrate Judge, Meriweather handled reports and recommendations for district court judges as well as discovery matters. See, e.g., In re DiGuilian, 314 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2018). Notably, Meriweather ruled that the District of Columbia had failed to adequately preserve evidence in a suit regarding four individuals who committed suicide in a D.C. jail, finding the District responsible for spoliation of evidence. See Mannina v. Dist. o Columbia, 437 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2020).

Political Activity

Meriweather has made political contributions only to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who was a classmate of hers at Yale Law School.

Overall Assessment

Meriweather comes to the Court of Federal Claims with extensive experience with civil litigation, particularly that affecting the federal government. She should be able to hit the ground running once confirmed.

90 CommentsLeave a comment

Judicial Nominations 2023 – Year in Review

Last year, Democrats caught an unexpected break when they retained control of the U.S. Senate (and narrowly expanded their majority. This has allowed Democrats to confirm a number of stalled nominees from the previous Congress and continue an increase in the number of confirmations from the previous two years (all numbers are drawn from the Federal Judicial Center). While Democrats have had a number of successes on the judicial nominations front this year, work remains if they are to match President Trump’s numbers on the judiciary.

Nominations

In the first Congress of his presidency, Biden submitted 148 nominees to Article III courts to the Senate, of which 98 were confirmed.  In 2023, counting resubmissions from the previous Congress, Biden submitted 95 nominees to the Senate (and announced five more that are yet to be submitted). Biden particularly increased the number of district court nominees announced from states with Republican senators. In his first two years in office, President Biden nominated twelve district court nominees from states with Republican senators (four each from Ohio and Pennsylvania, and one each from Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, and Wisconsin).  In comparison, this year, President Biden has announced nineteen district court nominees from states with Republican senators (four from Florida, three each from Louisiana and Texas, two each from Indiana and Oklahoma, and one each from Kansas, Nebraska, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming).

Confirmations

In 2021, the Senate confirmed 40 Article III judges: 11 judges to the U.S. Court of Appeals; and 29 judges to the U.S. District Court.  The Senate subsequently confirmed 57 in 2022: 1 to the Supreme Court; 17 to the Court of Appeals; and 39 to the District Courts.

In 2023, the Senate confirmed 69 Article III judges: 11 judges to the U.S. Court of Appeals; and 58 to the District Courts.  While this continues an upwards trajectory from the previous two years, it nonetheless leaves Biden short of the total number of confirmations that Trump achieved by this point in his Presidency.

Withdrawal

From the previous Congress to this one, a few judicial nominees did not make the cut for renomination. Eastern District of Wisconsin nominee William Pocan had been blue-slipped by GOP Senator Ron Johnson, despite Johnson having previously signed off on him.  With Johnson narrowly re-elected and Democrats not changing the district court blue slip policy so far, Pocan was not resubmitted.

Northern District of New York nominee Jorge Rodriguez was also not renominated but as the judge he was nominated to replace, Judge David Hurd, declined to take senior status, expressing opposition to Rodriguez not being a Utica-based practitioner.

Furthermore, Tenth Circuit nominee Jabari Wamble was also not renominated, instead being resubmitted for a district court seat in Kansas, before withdrawing his name from that seat as well on the heels of an unfavorable ABA review.

The most high-profile loss, for the White House, however, was that of First Circuit nominee Michael Delaney, who withdrew his nomination in the face of bipartisan opposition relating to his conduct in litigation involving an allegation of sexual assault. A replacement nominee, Seth Aframe, currently remains pending before the Senate.

Diversity

The Biden Administration has continued its focus on prioritizing women and racial/ethnic minorities for court seats, seeking to do so to offset the lack of diversity in the nominees of previous administrations.  They have also continued to pick nominees from backgrounds that are traditionally less likely to become judges, including public defenders, and civil rights attorneys.

However, the Administration, in drawing more nominees from states with Republican senators, has nominated more “traditional” nominees as well, with the eight new appellate nominees being submitted in 2023, including five men and three women, and three white men being nominated this year, the same number of white appellate nominees submitted in the entire previous Congress.

Overall Assessment

Despite a narrow 50-50 margin in the Senate last Congress, Democrats were able to largely keep pace with the Trump Administration’s confirmation numbers.  Nonetheless, the narrow margin meant that a large number of liberal nominees remained stuck waiting for final votes. The slightly-wider margin that Democrats have this year has allowed almost all the stalled nominees to be confirmed, despite opposition to a number of them from Sen. Joe Manchin.  As such, the Biden Administration has largely cleared the backlog of stalled nominees from 2022, with only a handful left to be confirmed. Additionally, after the previous Congress focused almost entirely on states without Republican senators, the White House has focused more aggressively on those states this year, naming nominees in a number of those seats. Overall, the White House has managed to keep pace with confirmations from previous years and is likely to exceed confirmation numbers achieved by previous Democratic presidents although it remains to be seen if he can match President Trump’s numbers.

29 CommentsLeave a comment

Adeel Mangi – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

A long search to replace Judge Joseph Greenaway on the Third Circuit led the White House to civil attorney Adeel Mangi. If confirmed, Mangi would fulfill several firsts on the bench, being the first Muslim American and Pakistani American on the appellate bench, as well as the only judge on the bench currently not to practice law under a J.D.

Background

Born Adeel Abdallah Mangi in Karachi, Pakistan in 1977, Mangi received a B.A. from the University of Oxford in 1998 and a Postgraduate Diploma from the City University London Inns of Courts in 1999 before getting an L.L.M. from Harvard Law School in 2000. Mangi then joined Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP where he has served as a partner since 2010.

History of the Seat

Mangi has been nominated for a New Jersey seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated by Judge Joseph Greenaway. Greenaway, named to the district court by President Clinton in 1996 and to the Third Circuit by President Obama in 2010 stepped away from the bench on June 15, 2023.

The Biden Administration considered a number of candidates for the vacancy before zeroing in on Mangi. See David Wildstein, Adeel Mangi is Top Candidate for Third Circuit Court of Appeals Seat, New Jersey Globe, Nov. 6, 2023, https://newjerseyglobe.com/fr/adeel-mangi-is-top-candidate-for-third-circuit-court-of-appeals-seat/. The initial frontrunner for the seat was New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Fabiana Pierre-Louis, who took herself out of the running during the process. See id. Mangi, who previously interviewed for a district court judgeship under President Trump was brought under consideration in September 2023 and was nominated on November 15, 2023.

Political Activity

Mangi has a handful of political contributions to his name, including contributions to Biden and to Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Legal Experience

While he is a resident of Jersey City, Mangi has practiced at the New York City Office of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP for his entire legal career, starting there in 2000, where he has focused on complex civil litigation. During his career, Mangi has tried eight bench and jury trials, including two jury trials in a trade secrets dispute in which Mangi secured a $2 billion jury verdict. See Appian Corp. v. Pegasystems, Inc., No. 2020-07216 (Circuit Court of Fairfax Cnty., Virginia). In other notable cases, Mangi represented the pet food company Blue Buffalo in defending a false advertising suit. See Blue Buffalo Co. Ltd. v. Wilbur-Ellis Co. LLC et al., No. 4:14-cv-00859.

Mangi has also briefed and/or argued approximately 30 appeals before federal and state courts of appeal, including appellate litigation before the Third Circuit on behalf of Johnson & Johnson in a suit against Walgreen. See Walgreen Co. v. Johnson & Johnson, 950 F.3d 195 (3d Cir. 2020).

Setting aside the civil and commercial litigation he worked on, Mangi also handled a number of notable pro bono cases. Notably, Mangi was plaintiff’s counsel for the estate of Karl Taylor, an inmate who died in a New York correctional facility. See Ramsay-Nobles, et al. v. Keyser et al., No. 1:16-cv-05778 (S.D.N.Y.). After a two week trial, Mangi settled the case for approximately $5 million. Mangi also represented Muslim groups in the towns of Bayonne and Bernards in suits after permits for building mosques were denied in the towns, leading to settlements and construction of the mosques in both towns. See Bayonne Muslims et al. v. City of Bayonne et al., No. 2:17-cv-03731 (D.N.J.) and The Islamic Society of Basking Ridge et al. v. Townships of Bernards et al., No. 3:16-cv-1369 (D.N.J.).

Additionally, Mangi has submitted numerous amicus briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court. For example, Mangi filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Muslim Bar Association of New York in support of the gay and transgender plaintiffs seeking protection under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga. See 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020). Mangi also represented various Muslim bar associations in opposition to the Trump travel bans. See Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392 (2018). Additionally, on the circuit level, Mangi represented a coalition of religious organizations as amici in a suit regarding whether the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) permits money damages. See Landor v. Louisiana Dep’t of Corr. & Pub. Safety, 82 F.4th 337 (5th Cir. 2023).

Overall Assessment

As a relatively young nominee with a number of liberal pro bono representations, it is perhaps unsurprising that Mangi has already drawn significant opposition from the right. However, it is surprising that much of the opposition at Mangi’s confirmation hearing centered around allegations of antisemitism based not on any statements or positions taken by Mangi himself but rather by others. Mangi’s pro bono representations took fairly little oxygen during an otherwise contentious confirmation hearing. This was perhaps a recognition that there is little in Mangi’s actual legal record that is likely to draw opposition. Barring anything surprising emerging about Mangi himself, Mangi is likely to be confirmed and will likely be a left-meaning but relatively mainstream judge on the Third Circuit.

321 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Gretchen Lund – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana

Longtime Elkhart County Judge Gretchen Lund is the Republican-half of a package deal struck between the White House and Indiana Senators for the Northern District of Indiana.

Background

A native Hoosier, Lund was born in 1975, and grew up in the Goshen city area, graduating from NorthWood High School in 1994. After getting an B.A. from Butler University in 1998, Lund attended Valparaiso University School of Law, graduating in 2001. Following her graduation, Lund joined the Indianapolis office of law firm Ice Miller LLP before leaving a year later to clerk for Judge William Lawrence on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

After her clerkship, Lund became a prosecutor with the Elkhart County Prosecutor’s Office.

In 2008, Lund was elected to be a Goshen City Judge and, since, 2015, has served as a Elkhart County Superior Court.

History of the Seat

Lund has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. This seat was vacated on July 17, 2023, when Judge Jon DeGuilio moved to senior status.

Legal Experience

Lund has had a relatively limited legal career prior to becoming a judge. Her time consisted of a short stint as an associate at the firm of Ice Miller in Indianapolis and serving as a prosecutor for a year in Elkhart County, where she practiced in both the City Court and the Child Support Division.

Political Activity

Lund ran in her judicial race as a Republican. See Lund to Seek Judicial Post, The Goshen News, Jan. 23, 2007, https://www.goshennews.com/news/local_news/lund-to-seek-judicial-post/article_0dbbd4e5-da40-5777-b27b-75812d81bec3.html. Additionally, while in college, Lund worked for Indiana Senate Republicans Robert Garton and Marvin Riegsecker.

Jurisprudence

In 2008, Lund was elected and started as a Goshen City Judge, where she presided over criminal misdemeanors, city ordinance disputes, and traffic infractions. Since 2015, Lund has served on the Elkhart County Superior Court, which serves as a trial court of general jurisdiction.

Among the matters she presided over, Lund entered judgment against a plastic manufacturer for retaliatory discharge after a jury found in favor of a terminated employee. See Best Formed Plastics, LLC v. Shoun, 51 N.E.3d 345 (Ind. App. 2016). In another notable case on appeal from the City Court, Lund found the defendant guilty of public indecency and sentenced him to one year in jail, a harsher sentence than he had received in city court. See Morris v. State, 114 N.E.3d 531 (Ind. App. 2018). Lund’s sentence was affirmed by the Indiana Court of Appeals. See id. at 540. In contrast, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a portion of Lund’s sentence when she ordered that the sentence for a violation of Indiana’s habitual offender statute be served consequently to a driving under the influence sentence, finding that the habitual offender statute did not create a separate crime but rather a sentencing enhancement. See Weekly v. State, 105 N.E.3d 1133 (Ind. App. 2018).

Overall Assessment

Starting as a city judge and then a superior court judge, Lund has been on the bench most of her career, and Lund’s record suggests that she would be a fairly mainstream, if slightly right-of-center judge. As Lund was presumably the choice of Indiana senators for the bench, she should be confirmed easily.

43 CommentsLeave a comment

Judge Cristal Brisco – Nominee to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana

A fixture of the South Bend legal community who previously worked under then Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Judge Cristal Brisco has been nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.

Background

Brisco received a B.A. cum laude from Valparaiso University in 2002. Following her graduation, Brisco attended the University of Notre Dame Law School, graduating in 2006.

Brisco subsequently joined Barnes & Thornburg LLP, where she worked until 2013, when she became Corporation Counsel for the City of South Bend under then-Mayor Pete Buttigieg. After a brief stint as General Counsel at St. Mary’s College, Notre Dame, Brisco became a magistrate judge for the Circuit Court of St. Joseph County in 2018.

In 2021, Governor Eric Newsom named Brisco to the St. Joseph County Superior Court, where she currently serves.

History of the Seat

Brisco has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. This seat was vacated on January 23, 2021, when Theresa Lazar Springmann moved to senior status.

Legal Experience

Brisco began her legal career as an associate at Barnes & Thornburg. While there, Brisco frequently represented the City of South Bend as private counsel, including in defending suits brought against the South Bend Housing Authority. See, e.g., Fincher v. South Bend Housing Authority, 612 F. Supp. 2d 1009 (N.D. Ind. 2009). Brisco also represented the City as an employer in defending against discrimination allegations. See Pittman v. Housing Authority of City of South Bend, 695 F. Supp. 2d 866 (N.D. Ind. 2010) (granting summary judgment to Defendant on allegations of racial discrimination and retaliation).

Between 2013 and 2018, Brisco worked as Corporation Counsel for the City of South Bend, Indiana. During that time, Brisco authored a letter declining to have the City Attorney’s Office represent Councilmember Henry Davis against a libel suit brought by police officers that Davis had alleged that made racist remarks. See Tom Perkins, ‘Look at His Record’: Buttigieg Faces New Criticism From His City’s Black Leaders, The Guardian, Sept. 26, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/25/pete-buttigieg-south-bend-lawsuit-police-shooting. Brisco also joined an amicus brief on behalf of the City of South Bend in a challenge to President Trump’s “Muslim travel ban.” See Intern. Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 857 F.3d 554 (4th Cir. 2017).

Political Activity

Brisco has a limited political history, which consists of donations to Indiana Democrats Joseph Donnelly and Mel Hall.

Jurisprudence

From 2018 to 2021, Brisco served as a magistrate judge on the Circuit Court for St. Joseph County. As a magistrate judge, Brisco was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court to a Study Commission on the Future of the Indiana Bar Exam. See In re Order Creating a Study Commission on the Future of the Indiana Bar Examination (Ind. 2018).

Since her appointment in 2021, Brisco has served on the St. Joseph County Superior Court, which serves as a trial court of general jurisdiction. Notably, Brisco granted summary judgment against most of the claims alleged by plaintiffs claiming injuries from use of the defendants’ swimming pool. See Pennington v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, 206 N.E.3d 473 (Ind. App. 2023). Brisco’s decision was affirmed by the Indiana Court of Appeals. See id. Additionally, as a Superior Court Judge, Brisco was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court to serve on the Indiana Commission on Equity and Access in the Court System. See In re Order Establishing the Indiana Commission on Equity and Access in the Court System, (Ind. 2021).

Overall Assessment

Brisco’s nomination, paired with that of Elkhart County Judge Gretchen Lund, is the Democratic half of the deal struck with Indiana Senators. That being said, while Brisco’s background does suggest some areas of progressive advocacy, it also shows a mainstream legal philosophy (one that led a Republican Governor to tap her for the bench). Overall, as long as Brisco maintains the support of her home state senators, she should be confirmed comfortably.

139 CommentsLeave a comment

Nicole Berner – Nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

After an extensive dispute over picking a candidate for the Fourth Circuit, the Biden Administration and Maryland senators have agreed on longtime labor lawyer Nicole Berner.

Background

Born in England, Nicole G. Berner grew up in California before getting a B.A. from U.C. Berkeley in 1988 and a J.D. from Berkeley School of Law and a M.P.P. from the Goldman School of Public Policy at Berkeley in 1995.

After graduating, Berner clerked for Judge Betty Binns Fletcher on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and for Judge Thelton Henderson on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Berner subsequently joined Jenner & Block as an Associate.

In 2004, Berner joined Planned Parenthood as a staff attorney. In 2006, she shifted to the Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”) as in-house counsel, becoming general counsel in 2017. She serves in this role.

History of the Seat

Berner has been nominated to replace U.S. Circuit Judge Diana Gribbon Motz, who moved to senior status on September 30, 2022. Berner’s nomination came almost two years after Motz first announced her departure, a delay that was allegedly attributed to a dispute in candidates between the White House and Sen. Ben Cardin. However, Cardin and Sen. Chris Van Hollen have both indicated their support for Berner.

Legal Experience

Other than her clerkships, Berner started her legal career at the firm of Jenner & Block. Notably, Berner was part of the legal team representing Michael Schiavo in the suit to permit him to end nutrition and hydration for his wife Terri Schiavo. See Bush v. Schiavo, 871 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 2d Dist. App. 2004). While at the firm, Berner was part of the legal team representing amici in a suit challenging Arkansas’ sodomy ban. See Jegley v. Picado, 80 S.W.3d 332 (Ark. 2002). Berner was also representing amici as part of a suit to strike down Kansas’ Romeo-and-Juliet law for distinguishing legal penalties based on whether couples were of the opposite sex or the same sex. See State v. Limon, 280 Kan. 275 (2005).

After her time at Jenner & Block, Berner spent two years at Planned Parenthood. While there, Berner was part of the legal team challenging Ohio’s ban on the drug mifepristone. See Planned Parenthood Cincinnati v. Taft, 444 F.3d 502 (6th Cir. 2006).

Since 2006, Berner has been in-house counsel for the union SEIU. In this role, Berner litigated across the country in cases where employers were accused of retaliating against union organizers or breaching union agreements. See, e.g., Finley Hosp. v. NLRB, 827 F.3d 720 (8th Cir. 2016). Berner has also served as counsel in litigation where SEIU has been sued for alleged violations. See, e.g., Bellitto v. Snipes, 221 F. Supp. 3d 1354 (S.D. Fla. 2016). During the Trump Administration, Berner was part of SEIU legal challenges to Trump executive orders governing union activities by government employees. See Service Employees Intern. Union Local 200 v. Trump, 419 F. Supp. 3d 612 (W.D.N.Y. 2019).

Additionally, Berner has served as amici counsel for unions in a number of different cases, including cases of marriage equality. See Windsor v. United States, 699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012). Berner also represented amici in Hawaii’s suit against the Trump travel ban. See Hawaii v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2017). More recently, Berner has represented amici in a challenge to abortion restrictions in Missouri. See Reproductive Health Servs. v. Parson, 1 F.4th 552 (8th Cir. 2021).

Writings and Media

Berner has written and commented frequently on the law, including the intersection of the law and LGBT issues. See, e.g., Nicole Berner, Child Custody Disputes Between Lesbians: Legal Strategies and Their Limitations, 10 Berkeley Women’s L.J. 31, 32 (1995). Berner has also written on the challenges of being a female attorney. See Stephanie A. Scharf, Lorelei S. Masters, Nicole G. Berner, and Cynthia J. Robertson, Through the Glass Ceiling: Best Practices for Women Lawyers and Their Firms, 89 Women Law J. 7 (2003-2004).

In 2000, Berner was a plaintiff in Berner-Kadish v. Minister of Interior, a landmark Israeli Supreme Court case that recognized the rights of two mothers to be designated on a child’s birth certificate. The case, and subsequent legal support for same-sex parents in Israel, also led to media attention and profiles of Berner and her family. See, e.g., Meet the Berner-Kadish Family, New Israel Fund, June 11, 2015, available at https://www.nif.org/stories/human-rights-democracy/meet-the-berner-kadish-family/.

Political Activity

Berner has been a frequent donor to Democrats across the country, for example, donating to Sen. Elizabeth Warren in 2020. Berner has also given to unsuccessful senate candidates Cal Cunningham and Theresa Greenfield.

Overall Assessment

Berner comes to the federal bench with extensive litigation experience. Additionally, her work as a labor attorney and an attorney on LGBT and reproductive rights issues is likely to endear her to the left. However, those same qualifications are likely to attract strong opposition from conservatives. Additionally, conservatives may look askance at Berner’s wife’s representation of Christine Blasey Ford, who had accused Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault.

All in all, Berner is likely to be deemed a controversial nomination. If confirmed, Berner is likely to reinforce the liberal wing of the Fourth Circuit.

101 CommentsLeave a comment