DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Judiciary Tracker

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Federal Judiciary Tracker An up-to-date look at the federal judiciary and the status of President Trump’s judicial nominations January 30, 2020 Trump has had 184 federal judges confirmed while 61 seats remain vacant without a nominee Status of key positions President Trump inherited 108 federal requiring Senate !" judge vacancies confirmation As of January 29, 2020: No nominee Awaiting confirmation 157 judiciary positions have opened up Confirmed during Trump’s presidency and either "# remain vacant or have been filled Source: National Journal as of January 29, 2020 Total: "$% 265 potential Trump nominations Trump has had more circuit judges confirmed than the average of recent presidents at this point Number of Federal Judges Nominated and Confirmed *+,-. "&& ') ( >739+7?9=?:,+9=@,ABC==== 57+?,79=?:,+9=@,ABC==== D,.+C-C=5:,+9=@,ABC /01-1 #$ (' ( Source: Federal Judicial Center 2,34 "&# &) 56789:8 "'( &) ( ;<=2,34 #' &" ( In three years, Trump has confirmed a higher number of circuit judges as prior presidents in four years Number of Federal Judges Nominated and Confirmed *+,-. !"" '( ) >739+7?9=?:,+9=@,ABC==== 57+?,79=?:,+9=@,ABC==== D,.+C-C=5:,+9=@,ABC /01-1 !#! "( ) Source: Federal Judicial Center 2,34 !$% "' 56789:8 !$& "( ) ;<=2,34 !#% #) ) An overview of the Article III courts US District Courts US Court of Appeals Supreme Court Organization: Organization: Organization: ! The nation is split into 94 ! Federal judicial districts ! The Supreme Court is the federal judicial districts are organized into 12 highest court in the US ! The District of Columbia circuits, which each have a ! There are nine justices on and four US territories court of appeals. There are the bench: one chief justice have a district court 13 US Court of Appeals and eight associate justices ! There are three judges and no jury Court cases: ! The Court has jurisdiction ! District courts hear over all federal and state disputes in trial and have a Court cases: courts, and is the final jury and district judge who ! Circuit courts hear interpreter of federal law hear the cases challenges to district courts within its circuit The three courts listed here are Article III courts, meaning that they are federal courts established under Article III of the US Constitution and have lifetime appointments Source: Ballotpedia Trump inherited over 100 vacant judiciary seats to fill at the beginning of his presidency Number of Federal Judicial Vacancies At the Beginning of Each President’s Term &" %% >739+7?9=?:,+9=@,ABC==== 57+?,79=?:,+9=@,ABC==== D,.+C-C=5:,+9=@,ABC '% Source: Ballotpedia #! )$ )> !> !% !" !( ! *+,-. /01-1 2,34 56789:8? ;<=2,34 *George HW Bush signed the Judicial Improvement Act of 1990 which created 85 new federal judicial positions. Due to congressional opposition and the 1991 Iraq War, Bush was not able to fill many of these positions, ultimately leaving a large number for Clinton to fill. 105 federal judges will be eligible to take senior status during Trump’s four years in office Senior status: ! Article III judges can qualify for senior status through the “Rule of 80” ! Under senior status, judges continue to E hear cases, but only a fraction of the &! Circuit court District court normal case-load (semi-retirement) ! Starting at age 65, a judge can take senior judges judges status after having served 15 years '( ! The years of service required for senior ") status decreases as age increases (at 66, only 14 years needed, etc.) ! Judges who take senior status create a vacancy for the president to fill Appointed by a Republican Appointed by a Democrat Source: Ballotpedia 1st Circuit: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico and Rhode Island 6 judges* (4D, 2R), no vacancies Current judge Date President Nominee (if applicable) Date nominated 547CF=G HCFF+CI=;:J1+A ())( KL<L=2,34 H,18=*:++,C661 "#$% MC1B18 D18A+1=NI8?4 "##' 56789:8 /L=M:BC+7CC=*4:-.3:8= ()") /01-1 <76671-=O1I1991P=H+L= ()"& /01-1 >1Q7A=21++:8 ()"% /01-1 *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 2nd Circuit: Connecticut, New York and Vermont 13 judges* (6D, 7R), no vacancies Current judge Date President Nominee (if applicable) Date nominated 547CF=R M:0C+9=O19S-188 "### 56789:8 H:3T=510+18C3= "##% 56789:8 M:3C-1+I=U::6C+= "##$ 56789:8 UC9C+=;166 ())% KL<L=2,34 >C0+1=V88=N7Q78B39:8 ())E KL<L=2,34 >C88I=5478 ()") /01-1 M1I-:8A=N:47C+P=H+L= ()") /01-1 D,318=51+8CI ()"" /01-1 M7?41+A=D,667Q18 ()"$ *+,-. H:3C.4 W+18X=2718?: ()"# *+,-. Y7?41C6=;L=U1+X ()"# *+,-. <76671-=H:3C.4=Z1+A787 ()"# *+,-. D9CQC8=YC81347 ()"# *+,-. *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 3rd Circuit: Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and the US Virgin Islands 14 judges* (6D, 8R), no vacancies Nominee Date Nominee Date Current judge Date President Current judge Date President (if applicable) nominated (if applicable) nominated 547CF=R >L=2+::X3=D-794 ())( KL<L=2,34 U199I=D4J1+9S ()"& /01-1 *4C:A:+C=Y?OCC "##% 56789:8 54C+I6=V88=O+1,3C= ()"% /01-1 *4:-13=V-0+: ())) 56789:8 N,73=WC67.C=MC39+C.: ()"! /01-1 Y7?41C6=541B1+C3 ())! KL<L=2,34 D9C.418:3=27013 ()"E *+,-. OC89=H:+A18= ())! KL<L=2,34 >1Q7A=H1-C3=U:+9C+= ()"$ *+,-. *4:-13=;1+A7-18 ())E KL<L=2,34 U1,6=Y19CI ()"# *+,-. H:3C.4=K+CC81J1IP=H+L ()") /01-1 UC9C+=H:3C.4 U47..3 ()"# *+,-. *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 4th Circuit: Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia 15 judges* (9D, 6R), no vacancies Nominee Date Nominee Date Current judge Date President Current judge Date President (if applicable) nominated (if applicable) nominated 56789:8[=KL<L= V60C+9=>71S ()") /01-1 547CF=R M:BC+=K+CB:+I ())) 2,34 ;C8+I=W+18X678=W6:IA= ()"" /01-1 HL=;1+Q7C=<76X783:8=\\\ "#$% MC1B18= D9C.4187C=*41?XC+= ()"( /01-1 U1,6=Z7C-CIC+= "##) KL;L<L=2,34 U1-C61=;1++73= ()"% /01-1 >7181=K+700:8 Y:9S "##% 56789:8 H,67,3=ZC33=M7?41+A3:8= ()"$ *+,-. M:0C+9=O78B "##$ 56789:8 VL=Y1+Q78= ()"$ *+,-. KL=D9CQC8=VBCC ())$ KL<L=2,34 ],1996C01,-P=H+L= 21+01+1=Y7618:=OCC818 ()") /01-1 V6673:8=H:8C3=M,3478B ()"# *+,-. H1-C3=<I88P=H+L ()") /01-1 *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 5th Circuit: Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas 16 judges* (5D, 11R), 1 vacancy Nominee Date Nominee Date Current judge Date President Current judge Date President (if applicable) nominated (if applicable) nominated 547CF=R U+73?7661=/JC8 ())' KL=<L=2,34 D9C.4C8=;7BB783:8 ()"" /01-1 ^A794=H:8C3 "#$' MC1B18= K+CBB=5:391 ()"% /01-1 HC++I=^AJ78=D-794 "#$E MC1B18 >:8=<766C99 ()"$ *+,-. 51+6=D9CJ1+9 "##% 56789:8 H1-C3=;: ()"$ *+,-. H1-C3=>C8873 "##' 56789:8 D9,1+9=OI6C=>,8?18 ()"$ *+,-. HC887FC+=<16XC+=^6+:A ())E KL<L=2,34 O,+9=^8BC641+A9 ()"$ *+,-. NC367C=D:,94J7?X ())E KL<L=2,34 V8A+CJ=/6A41- ()"$ *+,-. 51941+781=;1I8C3 ())$ KL<L=2,34 _1?189=`^L=K+1AI=H:66Ia "#$( MC1B18 Z:=8:-78CC H1-C3=K+1QC3P=H+L= ()"" /01-1 *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 6th Circuit: Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee 16* judges (5D, 11R), no vacancies Nominee Date Nominee Date Current judge Date President Current judge Date President (if applicable) nominated (if applicable) nominated 547CF=R ML=K,I=5:6CP=H+L= "##' 56789:8 H18C=2+1839C99C+ D9+18?4 ()") /01-1 O1+C8=ZC63:8=Y::+C "##' 56789:8 2C+87?C=2L=>:816A ()"" /01-1 ^+7?=561I "##E 56789:8 V-,6=*41.1+ ()"E *+,-. H,671=D-794=K700:83 ())( KL<L=2,34 H:48=2,34 ()"E *+,-. HCFF+CI=D,99:8 ())& KL<L=2,34 H:18=N1+3C8 ()"E *+,-. M7?41+A=K+7FF78 ())' KL<L=2,34 H:48=Z16018A718 ()"$ *+,-. M1I-:8A=OC946CABC ())$ KL<L=2,34 541A=MC1A6C+ ()"# *+,-. ;C6C8C=<479C ())$ KL<L=2,34 ^+7?=Y,+.4I ()"# *+,-. *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 7th Circuit: Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin 11 judges* (2D, 9R), no vacancies Current judge Date President Nominee (if applicable) Date nominated 547CF=R >718C=U1-C61=<::A "##' 56789:8 H:C6=W61,- "#$& MC1B18 W+18X=^139C+0+::X "#$' MC1B18 Y7?41C6=O188C "#$E MC1B18 \6181=M:Q8C+= "##( KL;L<L=2,34 >718C=DIXC3 ())% KL<L=2,34 >1Q7A=;1-769:8 ())# /01-1 V-I=21++C99 ()"E *+,-. Y7?41C6=2+C8818 ()"$ *+,-. Y7?41C6=D?,AAC+ ()"$ *+,-. V-I=D9L=^QC ()"$ *+,-. *Does not include federal judges with senior status who in some cases have authority to vote in en banc decisions **Announced they will take senior status this year !"#$%&'()@A=5:,+93B=CDED+16=F,E7G716=5D89D+ 8th Circuit: Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota 11 judges* (1D, 10R), no vacancies Current judge Date President Nominee (if applicable) Date nominated 547CF=R N1QC83X7 D-794 ())( KL<L=2,34 H1-C3=N:XC8 "##) KL;L<L=2,34 D9CQC8=5:66:9:8 ())& KL<L=2,34 M1I-:8A=K+,C8AC+ ())% KL<L=2,34 >,18C=2C89:8 ())% KL<L=2,34 2:00I=D4C.4C+A ())! KL<L=2,34 H18C=OC66I ()"& /01-1 M16.4=^+7?X3:8 ()"E *+,-.
Recommended publications
  • Senate the Senate Met at 9:30 A.M

    Senate the Senate Met at 9:30 A.M

    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 109 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 151 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2005 No. 66 Senate The Senate met at 9:30 a.m. and was U.S. SENATE, EXECUTIVE SESSION called to order by the Honorable SAM PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, BROWNBACK, a Senator from the State Washington, DC, May 18, 2005. of Kansas. To the Senate: NOMINATION OF PRISCILLA Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, RICHMAN OWEN TO BE UNITED PRAYER of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE FOR appoint the Honorable SAM BROWNBACK, a THE FIFTH CIRCUIT The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- Senator from the State of Kansas, to per- fered the following prayer: form the duties of the Chair. Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask Let us pray. TED STEVENS, unanimous consent that the Senate Eternal Spirit, the fountain of light President pro tempore. now proceed to executive session to and wisdom, without Whom nothing is Mr. BROWNBACK thereupon as- consider calendar No. 71, the nomina- holy and nothing prevails, You have sumed the Chair as Acting President tion of Priscilla Owen to be United challenged us to let our lights shine, so pro tempore. States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Cir- that people can see our good works and cuit; provided further that the first glorify Your Name. f hour of debate, from 9:45 to 10:45, be Today, shine the light of Your pres- RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME under the control of the majority lead- ence through our Senators and illu- er or his designee; further that the minate our Nation and world.
  • Federal Appellate Judges' Choices About Gender-Neutral Language

    Federal Appellate Judges' Choices About Gender-Neutral Language

    Articles Framing Gender: Federal Appellate Judges' Choices About Gender-Neutral Language By JUDITH D. FISCHER* Introduction LANGUAGE IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT in the two fields at the center of this Article. Language is the tool of the legal profession,1 and feminists recognize that language has been an instrument of both women's oppression and their liberation.2 This Article considers a question relevant to both fields: Are judges using gender-neutral lan- guage? For lawyers, the answer may inform their choice of wording when they write for judges.3 For feminists, the answer will be one marker of the success of their efforts in language reform. * Judith D. Fischer is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Louisville's Louis D. Brandeis School of Law. She appreciates the invaluable contribution to this Article's statistical analysis by Professor Jose M. Fernandez of the University of Louisville's Department of Economics and by attorney and mathematics doctoral candidate Carole Wastog. She thanks the law faculty at Indiana University at Indianapolis for their insightful suggestions at a presentation about this study. She is also grateful to Professors Craig Anthony Arnold, Kathleen Bean, Nancy Levit, Nancy Rapoport, and Joel Schumm for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts. Finally, thanks go to Amy Jay for her excellent research assistance. 1. See, e.g., FRANK E. COOPER, WRITING IN LAW PRAcTICE 1 (1963) ("[L]awyers have but one tool-language."); DAVID MELLINKOFF, THE LANGUAGE OF THE LAw, at vii (1963) ("The law is a profession of words."); Debra R. Cohen, Competent Legal Wrting-A Lauryer's ProfessionalResponsibility, 67 U.
  • Visiting Judges

    Visiting Judges

    Visiting Judges Marin K. Levy* Despite the fact that Article III judges hold particular seats on particular courts, the federal system rests on judicial interchangeability. Hundreds of judges “visit” other courts each year and collectively help decide thousands of appeals. Anyone from a retired Supreme Court Justice to a judge from the U.S. Court of International Trade to a district judge from out of circuit may come and hear cases on a given court of appeals. Although much has been written about the structure of the federal courts and the nature of Article III judgeships, little attention has been paid to the phenomenon of “sitting by designation”—how it came to be, how it functions today, and what it reveals about the judiciary more broadly. This Article offers an overdue account of visiting judges. It begins by providing an origin story, showing how the current practice stems from two radically different traditions. The first saw judges as fixed geographically, and allowed for visitors only as a stopgap measure when individual judges fell ill or courts fell into arrears with their cases. The second assumed greater fluidity within the courts, requiring Supreme Court Justices to ride circuit—to visit different regions and act as trial and appellate judges—for the first half of the Court’s history. These two traditions together provide the critical context for modern-day visiting. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38ZK55M67 Copyright © 2019 California Law Review, Inc. California Law Review, Inc. (CLR) is a California nonprofit corporation. CLR and the authors are solely responsible for the content of their publications.
  • Congressional Record—Senate S8340

    Congressional Record—Senate S8340

    S8340 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 9, 2002 reaching the authorization of the funds Midwestern States—is that just refers CONCLUSION OF MORNING available. Certainly that authorization to farmers. I want to tell you it is BUSINESS is not totally enough to fill all the farmers, but it is also those who raise The PRESIDING OFFICER. Morning needs, but it is an improvement over livestock, cattle, and sheep. People business is closed. the past. who are in that business need to be rec- f This also gives an opportunity for ognized as well, in terms of what we do those counties to create their own fi- here to help the agricultural industry EXECUTIVE SESSION nancial structure, much of which often during the drought. We will be dealing is tourism, which, again, is costly. I with that. We will come back to it. NOMINATION OF KENNETH A. thank the committee for what they I say again I hope we can set some MARRA, OF FLORIDA, TO BE have done with respect to payments in priorities for the relatively limited UNITED STATES DISTRICT lieu of taxes to the counties. I hope we amount of time left of this Congress. I JUDGE FOR THE SOUTHERN DIS- are able to include that. Our allocation hope that we select those items that TRICT OF FLORIDA is larger than the House and we need to are timely, that need to be done. I un- bring that up so we have a satisfactory derstand when we come to the end of a The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under arrangement. session everybody has ideas of things the previous order, the hour of 1 p.m.
  • Appellate Practice Webinar

    Appellate Practice Webinar

    U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Appellate Practice Webinar September 8, 2021 Richmond, VA ********************************************************************** 1. Agenda ********************************************************************** FOURTH CIRCUIT APPELLATE PRACTICE WEBINAR S EPTEMBER 8, 2021, 9:00 A . M .– 12:00 P . M . Introduction: Circuit Judge James A. Wynn, Jr. 9:00 Insights on Supreme Court and Appellate Practice Chief Judge Roger Gregory leads a conversation with Michael Dreeben, former Deputy Solicitor General in charge of the government’s criminal docket. During his 30-year career with the Office of the Solicitor General, Mr. Dreeben argued over 100 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, becoming known for the brilliance of his intellect, his mastery of the art of oral argument, and his commitment to the ideals of justice. In this session, Mr. Dreeben shares his insights on Supreme Court and appellate practice and on representing the United States before the Supreme Court. Roger L. Gregory, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Michael R. Dreeben, Co-Chair, White Collar Defense and Corporate Investigations Practice, O’Melveny & Myers LLP Introduction: Circuit Judge James A. Wynn, Jr. 10:00 Effective Advocacy before the Fourth Circuit Circuit Judge Albert Diaz moderates a panel discussion with Circuit Judges Paul Niemeyer and Stephanie Thacker and appellate attorneys Kannon Shanmugam and Jennifer May-Parker. The panel shares the dos and don’ts of briefing and argument, answers questions about Fourth Circuit practice and procedure, and offers strategies for effective representation on appeal. Albert Diaz, Circuit Judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Paul V. Niemeyer, Circuit Judge, U.S.
  • Kavanaugh Part 2

    Kavanaugh Part 2

    Dinh, Viet From: Dinh, Viet Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:52 PM To: Willett, Don; Koebele, Steve; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Enron/Owen Options Heather and Matt: Thoughts? Feinstein told Hutcheson that she has a problem with Owen not returning Enron contributions, an(b) (5) -----Original Message----- From: Willett, Don Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:56 AM To: Koebele, Steve; Dinh, Viet Subject: RE: Enron/Owen Options (b) (5) -----Original Message----- From: Koebele, Steve Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 9:33 AM To: Dinh, Viet Cc: Willett, Don Subject: Enron/Owen Options Viet, for your discussions today, please consider the following options ... (b) (5) Suggestion: (b) (5) Options: 1 2(b) (5) 007104-002458 Document ID: 0.7.19343.7387 3 Viet, I again recommen 007104-002459 Document ID: 0.7.19343.7387 Dinh, Viet From: Dinh,Viet Sent: Wednesday,March20,200212:14PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: VRADraftViewsletter Attachments: VRAviewsletter--final.wpd 007104-002460 Document ID: 0.7.19343.7300 Koebele, Steve From: Koebele, Steve Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:39 PM To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Cc: McMahon, Lori; Goodling, Monica; Willett, Don; Dinh, Viet; O'Brien, Pat; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; (b)(6) Jennifer Oschal Email Dinh, Viet; Newstead, Jennifer; Keefer, WendyJ Subject: Owen Attachments Attachments: Biography-Owen.wpd; Campaign Fin-Enron 03-01-02.wpd All --Attached for your use are two documents related to Justice Owen: (1) a Biography that showcases her strong background;and (2) responsive talking points on the Enron case opinion.
  • Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K

    Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K

    Cornell Law Review Volume 103 Article 2 Issue 1 November 2017 Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K. Levy Duke University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Courts Commons Recommended Citation Marin K. Levy, Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals, 103 Cornell L. Rev. 65 (2017) Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol103/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\103-1\CRN102.txt unknown Seq: 1 17-NOV-17 13:58 PANEL ASSIGNMENT IN THE FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS Marin K. Levy† It is common knowledge that the federal courts of appeals typically hear cases in panels of three judges and that the composition of the panel can have significant consequences for case outcomes and for legal doctrine more generally. Yet neither legal scholars nor social scientists have focused on the question of how judges are selected for their panels. Instead, a substantial body of scholarship simply assumes that panel assignment is random. This Article provides what, up until this point, has been a missing account of panel assignment. Drawing on a multiyear qualitative study of five circuit courts, including in-depth inter- views with thirty-five judges and senior administrators, I show that strictly random selection is a myth, and an improb- able one at that—in many instances, it would have been im- possible as a practical matter for the courts studied here to create their panels by random draw.
  • Advise & Consent

    Advise & Consent

    The Los Angeles County Bar Association Appellate Courts Section Presents Advise & Consent: A Primer to the Federal Judicial Appointment Process Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Program - 12:00 - 1:30 PM Zoom Webinar CLE Credit: 1.5 Hours Credit (including Appellate Courts Specialization) Provider #36 The Los Angeles County Bar Association is a State Bar of California approved MCLE provider. The Los Angles County Bar Association certifies that this activity has been approved for MCLE credit by the State Bar of California. PANELIST BIOS Judge Kenneth Lee (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) Kenneth Kiyul Lee is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Senate confirmed him on May 15, 2019, making him the nation’s first Article III judge born in the Republic of Korea. Prior to his appointment, Judge Lee was a partner at the law firm of Jenner & Block in Los Angeles, where he handled a wide variety of complex litigation matters and had a robust pro bono practice. Judge Lee previously served as an Associate Counsel to President George W. Bush and as Special Counsel to Senator Arlen Specter, then-chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He started his legal career as an associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz in New York. Judge Lee is a 2000 magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School and a 1997 summa cum laude graduate of Cornell University. He clerked for Judge Emilio M. Garza of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit from 2000 to 2001. Judge Leslie Southwick (Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals) Leslie Southwick was appointed to the U.S.
  • Appellate Judicial Appointments During the Clinton Presidency: an Inside Perspective

    Appellate Judicial Appointments During the Clinton Presidency: an Inside Perspective

    APPELLATE JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS DURING THE CLINTON PRESIDENCY: AN INSIDE PERSPECTIVE Sarah Wilson* INTRODUCTION This essay provides an overview of the federal judicial nomination and confirmation processes from the perspective of a former Clinton administration attorney involved in the judicial selection process from 1997 to 2001. It then focuses on judicial appointments to the United States Courts of Appeals for the Fourth and the Ninth Circuits to illustrate the complex political and historical dynamics of appellate appointments during the divided-government phase of the Clinton presidency, when the legislative and executive branches were controlled by opposing parties. This essay is intended to provide practitioners and judges with a better understanding of how the judicial appointment process functions, and to add a participant observer account to more detached scholarly analyses of the process. THE JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT PROCESS Oliver Wendell Holmes's observation that the life of the law is rooted less in logic than in experience' applies equally to the judicial appointment process. The interdependent and sometimes competing roles of the legislative and executive branches are described in general terms in the constitutional * Ms. Wilson was Deputy Assistant Attorney General (1997-98), Associate Counsel to the President (1998-2000), and Senior Counsel for Nominations (2000-2001) during the Clinton administration. The author thanks Caleb Fassett and Ruthanne Deutsch for research assistance. 1. Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Common Law I (Little, Brown & Co. 1881). THE JOURNAL OF APPELLATE PRACTICE AND PROCESS Vol. 5, No. 1 (Spring 2003) THE JOURNAL OF APPELLATE PRACTICE AND PROCESS text,2 but the inner workings of the nomination and confirmation processes are the product of the gradual accretion of executive and legislative practices and prerogatives developed over time, and with some regional differences.
  • Download the Full Magazine

    Download the Full Magazine

    X Like most everything in the era of COVID-19, this issue of the Law Quadrangle looks a bit different than normal. Circumstances related to the pandemic have required this temporary shift to a shorter print magazine with additional content posted online at quadrangle.law.umich.edu. We look forward to delivering “ I was probably one a full print issue of the Law Quadrangle as soon as circumstances permit. In the meantime, stay safe, stay healthy, and Go Blue! of the happiest lawyers around … But then I got the proverbial offer I couldn’t refuse.” —DAVID BREACH, ’94 04 10 02 10 12 BRIEFS CAN COVID-19 FROM @UMICHLAW HELP EXPAND BOTTLED ACCESS TO JUICE TO JUSTICE? HIGH FINANCE READ MORE ONLINE Class Notes year by year and In Memoriam are online for this issue of the Law Quadrangle. Visit quadrangle.law.umich.edu to read updates from your classmates, as well as profiles of Dan Bergeson, ’82, and Laurence Kahn, ’77. 21 14 16 20 21 IN PRACTICE IMPACT CLASS NOTES CLOSING DIRECTING PHILANTHROPY BARBARA MODERNIZING A HISTORIC AT MICHIGAN GARAVAGLIA, ‘80 ROOM 100 ELECTION LAW AT THE NEXUS OF LAW, MEDIA, AND ADVOCACY BRIEFS Professor from Practice Barbara McQuade, ’91, has launched a new Eli Savit, ’10, was sworn in as Washtenaw County Prosecutor by Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Bridget Mary podcast, #SistersInLaw, McCormack during a socially distant ceremony in the Law alongside three co-hosts. Quad. Savit previously served as senior adviser and legal Since its January launch, counsel to Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan, ’83, and is a lecturer at the Law School.
  • Welcome to the Brief Welcome to the Latest Issue of the Brief, Our Newsletter Designed to Keep You Updated on What’S Happening at Your Virginia Law Foundation

    Welcome to the Brief Welcome to the Latest Issue of the Brief, Our Newsletter Designed to Keep You Updated on What’S Happening at Your Virginia Law Foundation

    February 2021 | Issue 28 Welcome to The Brief Welcome to the latest issue of The Brief, our newsletter designed to keep you updated on what’s happening at your Virginia Law Foundation. Here are a few things you might have missed: • Congratulations to the Fellows Class of 2021, inducted in a virtual ceremony on the evening of January 21st. In case you missed it, watch the video now or read about these 18 outstanding citizen lawyers in this story on our website! • New Online Bundle Sale Options: Our 12-Credit Online Bundle is now only $399! 4- and 8-credit options also available, or try our new 16-Credit Practice-Builder Bundle! Fulfill your requirements this year and beyond with live-interactive webcasts and online CLE seminars. The Practice-Builder Bundle is eligible for our six-month interest-free payment plan and also includes coupons for TWO books of your choice! Learn more. • Virginia CLE’s 2021 Seminar Calendar is now available on our website. Browse by date and register for your favorites today! Many, many more seminars will be added throughout 2021. Check back periodically for updates. • Join us on March 24 for our next Encore CLE Online Benefit Concert! Learn about Recent Developments in Ethics and then enjoy the music of hit songwriter and President of the Nashville Songwriters Association International, Steve Bogard. Share the concert with your entire household! Two Options: Encore CLE plus Concert $65; Concert only $10. • Deadline for Grant Submissions: The Virginia Law Foundation is now accepting 2021 grant applications, due on March 15.
  • Activities Report COMMITTEE on the JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE 2005–2006

    Activities Report COMMITTEE on the JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE 2005–2006

    1 109TH CONGRESS " ! REPORT 2d Session SENATE 109–369 Activities Report OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE 2005–2006 DECEMBER 22, 2006.—Ordered to be printed Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of December 9 (legislative day December 8), 2006 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 59–010 WASHINGTON : 2007 VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:03 Jan 10, 2007 Jkt 059010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\PICKUP\SR369.XXX SR369 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with HEARING E:\Seals\Congress.#13 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts JON KYL, Arizona JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware MIKE DEWINE, Ohio HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin JOHN CORNYN, Texas CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois TOM COBURN, Oklahoma MICHAEL O’NEILL, Chief Counsel and Staff Director BRUCE A. COHEN, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director (II) VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:03 Jan 10, 2007 Jkt 059010 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\PICKUP\SR369.XXX SR369 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with HEARING C O N T E N T S Page INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... I. MAJOR BILLS AND HEARINGS ................................................................ 5 A. CIVIL LAW ISSUES .......................................................................