DOCSLIB.ORG

Year-In-Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Year-in-Review 2014-15 President’s Message.............................................................................. .2 In the News.............................................................................................................5 Membership............................................................................................................6 2015 NAPABA Convention Highlights............................................................... 10 Awards.................................................................................................................. 12 Regional Conferences ......................................................................................... 14 Annual Lobby Day. .............................................................................................. 16 Policy Resolutions................................................................................................. 18 Amicus Briefs.........................................................................................................19 Special Recognition ............................................................................................. 20 Judicial & Executive Branch Nominations .......................................................... 21 Partnerships ......................................................................................................... .22 Specialty Programs..............................................................................................24 Committees, Networks & Councils... ................................................................. 26 Supporting the Next Generation ....................................................................... 27 NAPABA Law Foundation ................................................................................... 28 Convention Sponsors .......................................................................................... 29 NAPABA Law Foundation Sponsors .................................................................. 30 2014-15 Board of Governors............................................................................. 31 Past Presidents...................................................................................................... 32 NAPABA Staff.......................................................................................................33 1 2014-15 President’s Message Dear NAPABA Members, Affiliates, Sponsors, and Supporters: Welcome to the third NAPABA Year-in-Review, which provides an overview of NAPABA’s activities in 2015. Since its founding 28 years ago, NAPABA has remained faithful to its core mission of: (1) serving as the national voice for the Asian Pacific American legal profession; (2) promoting justice, equity and opportunity for Asian Pacific Americans; and (3) fostering professional development, legal scholarship, advocacy, and community involvement. NAPABA’s activities during this past year maintained these objectives as priorities for our bar association, particularly as we continued to implement our Strategic Plan for the benefit of the 50,000 Asian Pacific American lawyers and judges in our country today and also for the benefit of the overall Asian Pacific American population, which is the fastest growing community in the United States. Implementation of the Strategic Plan was particularly meaningful for me this year because four years ago, I chaired a task force that created the Plan under the direction of then-President Nimesh Patel. We are grateful to our sponsors whose generous financial support enabled the NAPABA Board of Governors, the NAPABA committees and their co-chairs, and the NAPABA staff to continue to implement our Strategic Plan. While implementing the Plan this past year, we focused on six main objectives with your assistance: 1. Lobby Day: We expanded this annual event during Asian Pacific American Heritage Month in May 2015 to include nearly 60 lawyers from across the country who had more than 50 meetings with senators, representatives, or their staff members on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., during a two-day period to advocate for the end of racial profiling, the passage of the Voting Rights Amendment Act, and comprehensive immigration reform. 2. Affiliate Grant Program: The launching of this inaugural program awarded funds to five of our affiliates for programs that supported their members and local Asian Pacific American communities: • a pro bono legal clinic by the South Asian Bar Association of Washington (SABA of Washington); • a citizenship workshop by the Asian Pacific American Bar Association of South Florida (APABASF); • a judicial pipeline project by the Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Los Angeles (APABA-LA); • a seminar about the U.S. legal system for the Korean American immigrant community by the Korean American Bar Association of Washington (KABA-WA); and • a solo/small firm incubator by the Orange County Korean American Bar Association (OC-KABA). 2 2015 Year-In-Review 2014-15 President’s Message continued 3. Regional Conferences: We enhanced our four NAPABA Regional Conferences (Honolulu, Orlando, Minneapolis, and Boston) where nearly 600 lawyers and judges attended newly created sessions regarding NAPABA’s advocacy efforts to increase the diversity on the federal bench, and how each of our members and affiliates can advocate for their local Asian Pacific American communities. Special thanks to our NAPABA Regional Conference Committee Co-Chairs Tirzah Abe Lowe (CA) and Daniel Sakaguchi (MO), and our Regional Conference Co-Chairs Amy Lin Meyerson (CT), Will Lee (HI), Kim Nguyen (FL), Jessica Hew (FL), Irene Kao (MN), Malika Kanodia (MN), Peggy Ho (MA), and Minh Le (MA), for their leadership on this important initiative. 4. Direct Membership Drive: We implemented a new membership model that gave members control and customization over their profiles. Thank you to the thousands of affiliate and direct members who activated their membership using the new NAPABA website. Thank you, also, to Karen Korematsu, the daughter of Fred Korematsu, for inspiring us to add a new category of non-lawyer NAPABA members. If you haven’t done so yet, please consider becoming a Direct Member today! 5. Coalition of Bar Associations of Color (CBAC): In 2015, we had the privilege of hosting CBAC, and along with the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA), the National Bar Association (NBA), the National Native American Bar Association (NNABA), jointly lobbied White House officials and various senators and their staffers regarding issues that affect all communities of color: increased diversity on the federal bench, comprehensive immigration reform, and racial profiling. 6. NAPABA Law Foundation (NLF): We continued to strengthen our partnership with the NLF, which is the 501(c)(3) entity affiliated with NAPABA that offers scholarships to law students and that also offers fellowships to new law school graduates, among other charitable activities. As part of our partnership, NAPABA donated another $100,000 to the NLF in 2015. Thank you for “getting involved now” and for joining me and the rest of your NAPABA leadership team to continue to grow and create a future that each of us can proudly own. Please also join me in thanking our seven full-time NAPABA staff members, led by our steadfast Executive Director Tina Matsuoka, for being a major part of all of NAPABA’s activities, events, and accomplishments. Yours faithfully, George Chen NAPABA President 2014-15 3 NAPABA is at the forefront of national and The National Asian Pacific American local activities to increase the diversity of Bar Association (NAPABA) is the national the federal and state judiciaries, protect civil association of Asian Pacific American rights, combat anti-immigrant sentiment and attorneys, judges, law professors, and law hate crimes, and support the professional students. development of people of color in the legal profession. NAPABA represents the interests of over 50,000 attorneys and over 75 national, state, NAPABA engages in legislative and and local bar associations. Its members policy advocacy, promotes Asian Pacific include solo practitioners, large firm lawyers, American political leadership and political corporate counsel, legal services and non- appointments, and builds coalitions within profit attorneys, and lawyers serving at all the legal profession and the community at levels of government. large. NAPABA also serves as a resource for government agencies, members of Congress, NAPABA was established in November and public service organizations about Asian 1988 as a result of the organizing efforts of Pacific Americans in the legal profession, civil trailblazing Asian Pacific American attorneys rights, and diversity in the courts. from around the country. Since its inception, NAPABA has been a leader in addressing In 2015, NAPABA entered its 27th year as civil rights issues confronting Asian Pacific the only national pan-Asian bar association American communities and matters affecting serving the needs of the entire Asian Pacific Asian Pacific Americans in the legal American legal community. NAPABA continues profession. Through a national network to grow due to the contributions and support of members and affiliated organizations, of our many sponsors and members. MISSION • We are the national voice for the Asian Pacific American legal profession. • We promote justice, equity, and opportunity for Asian Pacific Americans. • We foster professional development, legal scholarship, advocacy,
Recommended publications
  • Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

    Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

    Golden Gate University Law Review Volume 46 Article 4 Issue 1 Ninth Circuit Survey March 2016 Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev Part of the Judges Commons Recommended Citation , Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 46 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. xiii (2016). http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev/vol46/iss1/4 This Introduction is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Golden Gate University Law Review by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 37275-ggl_46-1 Sheet No. 7 Side A 01/13/2016 11:44:49 \\jciprod01\productn\G\GGL\46-1\bio461.txt unknown Seq: 1 13-JAN-16 9:24 et al.: Judges of the Ninth Circuit JUDGES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT1 CHIEF JUDGE SIDNEY R. THOMAS Judge Thomas is currently serving a seven-year term as chief judge. President Clinton nominated Judge Thomas to the Ninth Circuit on July 19, 1995, and the Senate confirmed him on January 2, 1996. He received his B.A. from Montana State University in 1975, and his J.D. from the University of Montana School of Law in 1978. Judge Thomas practiced law with the firm of Moulton, Bellingham, Longo & Mather from 1978 until his appointment to the Ninth Circuit. He served as an Adjunct Instructor at Rocky Mountain College from 1982 to 1995.
  • Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules

    Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules

    ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL RULES November 2, 2020 AGENDA Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules November 2, 2020 1. Opening Business A. Chair’s Remarks and Administrative Announcements (Oral Report) B. ACTION: Review and Approval of Minutes • Draft Minutes of the May 5, 2020 Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules .......................................................23 C. Report of the Rules Committee Staff • Report on the June 2020 Meeting of the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure • Draft Minutes of the June 23, 2020 Meeting of the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure ...............49 • Report on the September 2020 Session of the Judicial Conference of the United States • September 2020 Report of the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure to the Judicial Conference of the United States (appendices omitted) ............................79 • Rules and Projects Pending Before Congress, the Supreme Court, the Judicial Conference, and the Rules Committees • Chart Tracking Proposed Rules Amendments ...............103 • Legislative Update • Legislation That Directly or Effectively Amends the Federal Rules (116th Congress) ...............................109 2. Draft New Rule 62 (Rules Emergency) A. Reporters’ Memorandum (October 14, 2020) ............................................121 B. Supporting Materials • Draft New Rule 62 and Committee Note .....................................141 • Chart Comparing Draft New Rule 62 with the CARES Act .......153 • Memorandum from Kevin Crenny, Rules
  • The Magazine of Ucla School of Law In-Depth Engagement

    The Magazine of Ucla School of Law In-Depth Engagement

    THE MAGAZINE OF UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW IN-DEPTH ENGAGEMENT UCLA Law’s Centers and Programs Produce Path-breaking Research and Purposeful Reform NINTH CIRCUIT ALUMNI APPOINTMENTS Jacqueline Nguyen ’91 and Paul Watford ’94 217111_Cover_R4.indd 1 9/6/12 10:49 AM contents 38 47 48 ninth circuit student assists new global reach appointments orleans community of student work Alumni Jacqueline Nguyen May Thi Nguyen ’13 Students conduct field ’91 and Paul Watford ’94 returned to New Orleans research in the Democratic are appointed to the U.S. to assist in the wake of Republic of the Congo. Court of Appeals for the the 2010 oil spill and Ninth Circuit. Hurricane Katrina. IN-DEPTH ENGAGEMENT UCLA Law’s centers and programs produce path-breaking research and purposeful reform UCLA School of Law has always pursued a distinctive approach to achieving impact at the local, state, national and international level. At UCLA Law, the mastery of doctrine, skills and theory serves as the foundation for transformative influence through advocacy and service. These priorities are reinforced through the work of the law school’s more than 20 interdisciplinary centers of excellence, which are shaping law and policy and carving an extraordinary path toward lasting change. 217111_Cover_R2.inddU 2 9/5/12 8:11 AM FALL 2012 VOL. 35 NO. 1 51 also inside... 02 Message from the Dean 16 Faculty Scholarship 36th annual 50 Law School Hosts Inaugural NYU-UCLA ucla entertainment symposium Tax Policy Conference CBS Corporation President and Chief Executive Officer 53 UCLA Law Celebrates Law School “Legends” Leslie Moonves was the keynote speaker.
  • Filling the Ninth Circuit Vacancies

    Filling the Ninth Circuit Vacancies

    William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 27 (2018-2019) Issue 4 Article 6 May 2019 Filling the Ninth Circuit Vacancies Carl Tobias Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Judges Commons, and the Law and Politics Commons Repository Citation Carl Tobias, Filling the Ninth Circuit Vacancies, 27 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1113 (2019), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol27/iss4/6 Copyright c 2019 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj FILLING THE NINTH CIRCUIT VACANCIES Carl Tobias* ABSTRACT Upon Republican President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit experienced some pressing appellate vacancies, which the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AO) carefully identified as “judicial emergencies” because the tribunal resolves a massive docket. Last year’s death of the iconic liberal champion Stephen Reinhardt and the late 2017 departure of libertarian former Chief Judge Alex Kozinski—who both assumed pivotal circuit leadership roles over numerous years—and a few of their colleagues’ decision to leave active court service thereafter, mean the tribunal presently confronts four judicial emergencies and resolves most slowly the largest number of appeals. The 2016 and 2018 federal election cycles—which render uncertain the party that will capture the presidency and the Senate at the polls in 2020—show that more posts could open when additional jurists determine that they will change status across the Trump Administration. Nevertheless, striking partisanship will frustrate the effort to appoint Ninth Circuit judges.

  • Nominate Judge Koh to the Ninth Circuit Again

    Washington and Lee Law Review Online Volume 74 Issue 1 Article 5 7-2017 Nominate Judge Koh to the Ninth Circuit Again Carl Tobias University of Richmond School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online Part of the Courts Commons, and the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Carl Tobias, Nominate Judge Koh to the Ninth Circuit Again, 74 WASH. & LEE L. REV. ONLINE 64 (2017), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online/vol74/iss1/5 This Development is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review Online by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOMINATE JUDGE KOH TO THE NINTH CIRCUIT AGAIN Carl Tobias Abstract During February 2016, President Barack Obama nominated United States District Judge Lucy Haeran Koh to a “judicial emergency” vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. She has capably served over multiple years in the Northern District of California competently deciding numerous high-profile lawsuits, specifically regarding intellectual property. Accordingly, the President’s efforts to confirm her were unsurprising. However, 2016 was a presidential election year when judicial nominations traditionally slow and ultimately halt. This difficulty was exacerbated when Republicans consistently refused to implement any confirmation process for United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Chief Judge Merrick Garland, the experienced and mainstream nominee whom the chief executive had chosen to fill Justice Antonin Scalia’s Supreme Court vacancy during March 2016.

  • “Firsts” on the Bench NAPABA National Convention 2016

    Pearls of Wisdom from APA “Firsts” on the Bench NAPABA National Convention 2016 The number of Asian Pacific Americans (APA) serving as judges in the United States is disproportionate to the number of APAs in both the general population and the number of lawyers nationwide. For example, as recently as 10 years ago, only 6 out of the 877 active federal judges were APAs, constituting .8% of the federal judiciary. At that time, APAs constituted 2.3% of the nation’s over 870,000 lawyers. More recently, as of early 2016, there were 25 APA federal judges, including four at the Court of Appeals level. This constitutes 2.8% of the federal judiciary, but APAs now constitute approximately 4% of the nation’s estimated 1.1 million lawyers. With respect to the general population, U.S. census data reflects that APAs constituted 4.2% of the population in 2000 and 5.6% of the population in 2010. The rise in the numbers of APA judges is recent. Indeed, for more than 170 years after the founding of the federal judiciary (1789-1961), there were no APA judges in its ranks. Not until 1961 did President John F. Kennedy nominate the first APA judge (Hon. Cyrus Niles Tavares) to a federal court of jurisdiction, namely, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii. It was another 35 years before an APA female was appointed to the federal bench, when President William J. Clinton appointed the Hon. Susan Oki Mollway to the U.S. District Court in Hawaii in 1998.
  • Congressional Record—Senate S7011

    Congressional Record—Senate S7011

    December 9, 2016 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S7011 memory of Javon Wilson and so many her life. That is who Kappy is—always experience of any Supreme Court nomi- others to roll up our sleeves and get to going above and beyond the call of nee ever. Republicans and Democrats work. duty. She has a great heart and pours alike have recognized Chief Judge Gar- f it into everything she does. land as a brilliant and impartial judge I want to thank Steve—Kappy’s hus- with unwavering fidelity to the rule of KATHARINE ‘‘KAPPY’’ SCATES band of more than 56 years—their chil- law. In this day and age, he was as Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I dren: Steve, Carole, Tim, Susie, and 18 much of a consensus Supreme Court want to say a few words about one of grandchildren—for sharing so much of nominee as one could find. The senior the most admired members of my staff, their wife, mother, and grandmother Republican Senator from Utah and Katharine ‘‘Kappy’’ Scates. Kappy is with the community. I also want to former chairman of the Judiciary Com- retiring at the end of the year. I don’t thank the entire Scates family, who mittee has previously noted that he know what we will do without her. Of- have lived in the Shawneetown area would be confirmed easily. It is not tentimes, public servants are in it for since the early 1800s. You can’t set foot hard to see why Chief Judge Garland the accolades—not Kappy. She, in her in southern Illinois without running has received significant bipartisan sup- own quiet way, just wanted to make a into a member of the Scates family.
  • Separation of Powers Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School

    Separation of Powers Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School

    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Supreme Court Preview Conferences, Events, and Lectures 2018 Section 6: Separation of Powers Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School, "Section 6: Separation of Powers" (2018). Supreme Court Preview. 278. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview/278 Copyright c 2018 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview VI. Separation of Powers In This Section: NEW CASE: Gundy v. United States ........................................................................................... 373 “SEX OFFENDER CASE MAY DEAL BLOW TO 'ADMINISTRATIVE STATE'” Jimmy Hoover ......................................................................................................................... 376 “THE SUPREME COURT MAY REVIVE A LEGAL THEORY LAST USED TO STRIKE DOWN NEW DEAL LAWS” Mark Joseph Stern ................................................................................................................... 379 “WILL SUPREME COURT PUSH CONGRESS TO GET BACK TO ITS JOB OF MAKING LAW?” Mark Miller ............................................................................................................................. 381 “UNITED STATES V. GUNDY” Justia Inc. ................................................................................................................................
  • Decision Making in Us Federal Specialized

    Decision Making in Us Federal Specialized

    THE CONSEQUENCES OF SPECIALIZATION: DECISION MAKING IN U.S. FEDERAL SPECIALIZED COURTS Ryan J. Williams A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Kevin T. McGuire Isaac Unah Jason M. Roberts Virginia Gray Brett W. Curry © 2019 Ryan J. Williams ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Ryan J. Williams: The Consequences of Specialization: Decision Making in U.S. Federal Specialized Courts (Under the direction of Kevin T. McGuire) Political scientists have devoted little attention to the role of specialized courts in the United States federal and state judicial systems. At the federal level, theories of judicial decision making and institutional structures widely accepted in discussions of the U.S. Supreme Court and other generalist courts (the federal courts of appeals and district courts) have seen little examination in the context of specialized courts. In particular, scholars are just beginning to untangle the relationship between judicial expertise and decision making, as well as to understand how specialized courts interact with the bureaucratic agencies they review and the litigants who appear before them. In this dissertation, I examine the consequences of specialization in the federal judiciary. The first chapter introduces the landscape of existing federal specialized courts. The second chapter investigates the patterns of recent appointments to specialized courts, focusing specifically on how the qualifications of specialized court judges compare to those of generalists. The third chapter considers the role of expertise in a specialized court, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and argues that expertise enhances the ability for judges to apply their ideologies to complex, technical cases.
  • February 28, 2016 President Barack Obama the White House 1600

    February 28, 2016 President Barack Obama the White House 1600

    www.napipa.org February 28, 2016 President Barack Obama The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Obama: The National Asian Pacific Islander Prosecutors Association (“NAPIPA”) urges you to nominate a qualified Asian Pacific Islander (“API”) U.S. Supreme Court Justice. NAPIPA is a non-profit professional organization dedicated to advancing the interests of prosecutors of API heritage and promoting a greater understanding of the criminal justice system in the API community. NAPIPA has members across the country, consisting of federal, state and local prosecutors, elected officials, and law students. NAPIPA is currently made up of five chapters, including New York, Chicago, Southern California, San Diego, and Northern California The diversity of our country is one of our greatest strengths. Brave new ideas often appear when the dynamics are changed. The importance of having a bench that matches the population of the country cannot be overstated. Judges are role models for their communities. When the men and women who deliver justice look more like our country, confidence grows in our legal system. While we acknowledge and applaud you for increasing the number of API judges on the federal bench from eight to twenty-five, we would point out that these numbers still reflect a per-capita underrepresentation of the nation’s fastest growing group. APIs make up almost 6% of the population and only 2% of the federal bench. Additionally, no API has ever even been interviewed for the U.S. Supreme Court. Of course we would never advocate the selection of an under qualified candidate.
  • Judges of Color: Examining the Impact of Judicial Diversity in the Equal

    Judges of Color: Examining the Impact of Judicial Diversity in the Equal

    Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume 46 Article 6 Number 1 Fall 2018 Fall 2018 Judges of Color: Examining the Impact of Judicial Diversity in the Equal Protection Jurisprudence of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Kristine L. Avena Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Kristine L. Avena, Judges of Color: Examining the Impact of Judicial Diversity in the Equal Protection Jurisprudence of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 46 Hastings Const. L.Q. 221 (2018). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol46/iss1/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 40701-hco_46-1 Sheet No. 119 Side A 10/23/2018 13:43:40 AVENA 10/23/2018 9:05 AM Judges of Color: Examining the Impact of Judicial Diversity in the Equal Protection Jurisprudence of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by KRISTINE L. AVENA* For too many people . law is a symbol of exclusion rather than empowerment. – Former Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, 2002 Introduction Article III, section 1 of the Constitution states, “[t]he judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”1 This imperative provision of the Constitution establishes the judiciary branch and maintains the balance of powers within the federal government.
  • Diversity and the Federal Bench

    Diversity and the Federal Bench

    Washington University Law Review Volume 87 Issue 5 2010 Diversity and the Federal Bench Carl Tobias University of Richmond Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Carl Tobias, Diversity and the Federal Bench, 87 WASH. U. L. REV. 1197 (2010). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol87/iss5/7 This Commentary is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DIVERSITY AND THE FEDERAL BENCH CARL TOBIAS Justice Sonia Sotomayor‘s appointment was historic. She is the first Latina Supreme Court member and President Barack Obama‘s initial appointment. Her confirmation is the quintessential example of his commitment to increasing ethnic and gender diversity in the judiciary; it epitomizes how the administration has nominated and appointed people of color and women to the appellate and district courts. Enhancing diversity honors valuable goals. Selection across a presidency‘s initial fifteen months also creates the tone. These ideas suggest that the nascent administration‘s judicial selection merits evaluation, which this paper conducts. Part I briefly assesses modern chief executives‘ divergent records in naming minority and female judges. Part II descriptively and critically evaluates the Administration‘s practices for choosing those jurists and the success realized. Ascertaining that Obama expeditiously nominated many well-qualified persons of color and women but the Senate approved few, the last portion offers recommendations for swift confirmation.