Obama Renominates More Than 40 Judicial Candidates

WASHINGTON -- Faced with the prospect of increasingly lengthy court vacancies, the White House on Wednesday formally renominated more than 40 judicial candidates whose possible appointments were left in limbo during the last congressional session.

The Obama administration sent the dozens of nominations -- 23 of which an official categorized as "emergency" nominees -- back to the Senate, where they will be considered anew by the Judiciary Committee. They may face an additional round of committee hearings, a Senate aide said, but that will be determined by Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and the ranking Republican, likely to be, according to a Senate aide, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

Hearings or no, the committee will have to vote on each candidate again before sending them back to the Senate floor for final consideration. And with more Republicans in the chamber than there were for the past two years, the nominees' chances may be slimmer.

Among those nominated again include 18 who had previously cleared the committee but were not confirmed by the Senate at large. That list includes contested figures like University of California law professor Goodwin Liu, Obama's nominee for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as well as California magistrate judge Edward Chen, nominated for the District Court for the Northern District of California. Twenty-four other renominated candidates never got a committee vote.

Judge Robert Chatigny, who Obama nominated for a seat on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals but had been held up over his positions on judicial restraint and sexual offenders, was not sent back to the Senate for consideration.

During his first two years in office, Obama had 62 judicial nominees confirmed by the Senate, compared to 100 for George W. Bush during the first congressional session of his presidency.

Democratic activists have categorized this disparity as a veritable crisis for the Obama administration, given the plethora of key issues working their way through the courts, including the president's health care law, Arizona's immigration reform measures, gay rights and gun control policy, among others. Those renominated had spent a combined 1,762 days awaiting consideration from the Senate during the last two years, according to a fact sheet sent by an administration official to The Huffington Post.

Even conservative legal luminaries have pushed to speed up the process. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts recently criticized the slow pace of judicial confirmations.

"[T]he unprecedented obstruction of judicial nominations seen in the last Congress, and the dramatic departure from the Senate's longstanding tradition of regularly considering consensus, noncontroversial nominations, marked a new chapter in what Chief Justice Roberts calls the 'persistent problem' of filling judicial vacancies," Leahy, the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, said in a statement.

With this as a backdrop, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced on Wednesday that they had agreed to establish a joint working group to study the issue of judicial confirmations, Roll Call reported.

Below are a list of the renominated and the person they are replacing, per the White House:

• Arenda L. Wright Allen, of Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia, vice Jerome B. Friedman, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Anthony J. Battaglia, of California, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, vice M. James Lorenz, retired. (Originally nominated on 5/20/10)
• Cathy Bissoon, of Pennsylvania, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania, vice Thomas M. Hardiman, elevated. (Originally nominated on 11/17/10)
• James Emanuel Boasberg, of the District of Columbia, to be United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, vice Thomas F. Hogan, retired. (Originally nominated on 6/17/10)
• Vincent L. Briccetti, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, vice Kimba M. Wood, retired. (Originally nominated on 11/17/10)
• Louis B. Butler, Jr., of Wisconsin, to be United Stated District Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin, vice John C. Shabaz, retired. (Originally nominated on 9/30/09)
• Susan L. Carney, of Connecticut, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Second Circuit, vice Barrington D. Parker, retired. (Originally nominated on 5/20/10)
• Claire C. Cecchi, of New Jersey, to be United States District Judge for the District of New Jersey, vice Joseph A. Greenaway, elevated. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Edward Milton Chen, of California, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, vice Martin J. Jenkins, resigned. (Originally nominated on 8/6/09)
• Max Oliver Cogburn, Jr., of North Carolina, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina, vice Lacy H. Thornburg, retired. (Originally nominated on 5/27/10)
• Mae A. D'Agostino, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of New York, vice Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., retired. (Originally nominated on 9/29/10)
• Roy Bale Dalton, Jr., of Florida, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, vice Henry Lee Adams, Jr., retired. (Originally nominated on 11/17/10)
• Sara Lynn Darrow, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, vice Joe B. McDade, retired. (Originally nominated on 11/17/10)
• Edward J. Davila, of California, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, vice Marilyn Hall Patel, retired. (Originally nominated on 5/20/10)
• Charles Bernard Day, of Maryland, to be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, vice Peter J. Messitte, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/21/10)
• Bernice Bouie Donald, of Tennessee, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, vice Ronald Lee Gilman, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Edward Carroll DuMont, of the District of Columbia, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Federal Circuit, vice Paul R. Michel, retired. (Originally nominated on 4/14/10)
• James E. Graves, Jr., of Mississippi, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, vice Rhesa H. Barksdale, retired. (Originally nominated on 6/10/10)
• Caitlin Joan Halligan, of New York, to be United States Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit, vice John G. Roberts, Jr., elevated. (Originally nominated on 9/29/10)
• Marco A. Hernandez, of Oregon, to be United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, vice Garr M. King, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/14/10)
• Paul Kinloch Holmes, III, of Arkansas, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, vice Robert T. Dawson, retired. (Originally nominated on 4/28/10)
• Mark Raymond Hornak, of Pennsylvania, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania, vice Donetta W. Ambrose, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Amy Berman Jackson, of the District of Columbia, to be United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, vice Gladys Kessler, retired. (Originally nominated on 6/17/10)
• Richard Brooke Jackson, of Colorado, to be United States District Judge for the District of Colorado, vice Phillip S. Figa, deceased. (Originally nominated on 9/29/10)
• Steve C. Jones, of Georgia, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Georgia, vice Orinda D. Evans, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/14/10)
• John A. Kronstadt, of California, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of California, vice Florence-Marie Cooper, deceased. (Originally nominated on 11/7/10)
• Goodwin Liu, of California, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, vice a new position created by Public Law 110-177, approved January 7, 2008. (Originally nominated on 2/24/10)
• Robert David Mariani, of Pennsylvania, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, vice James M. Munley, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Marina Garcia Marmolejo, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, vice Samuel B. Kent, resigned. (Originally nominated on 7/28/10)
• John J. McConnell, Jr., of Rhode Island, to be United States District Judge for the District of Rhode Island, vice Ernest C. Torres, retired. (Originally nominated on 3/10/10)
• Sue E. Myerscough, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, vice Jeanne E. Scott, resigned. (Originally nominated on 7/14/10)
• Victoria Frances Nourse, of Wisconsin, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Seventh Circuit, vice Terence T. Evans, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/14/10)
• Jimmie V. Reyna, of Maryland, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Federal Circuit, vice Haldane Robert Mayer, retired. (Originally nominated on 9/29/10)
• John Andrew Ross, of Missouri, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, vice Charles A. Shaw, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Esther Salas, of New Jersey, to be United States District Judge for the District of New Jersey, vice Katharine Sweeney Hayden, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Diana Saldaña, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, vice George P. Kazen, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/14/10)
• James E. Shadid, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, vice Michael M. Mihm, retired. (Originally nominated on 5/27/10)
• Kevin Hunter Sharp, of Tennessee, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Tennessee, vice Robert L. Echols, retired. (Originally nominated on 11/17/10)
• Michael H. Simon, of Oregon, to be United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, vice Ancer L. Haggerty, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/14/10)
• Amy Totenberg, of Georgia, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Georgia, vice Jack T. Camp, Jr., retired. (Originally nominated on 3/17/10)
• Michael Francis Urbanski, of Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, vice Norman K. Moon, retired. (Originally nominated on 12/1/10)
• Kathleen M. Williams, of Florida, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, vice Daniel T. K. Hurley, retired. (Originally nominated on 7/21/10)

Comments

[AFunkyNight]

04:05 PM on 01/06/2011

Mr. President

It has been a long time since I have written to you and so many things have happened since. I don't think you have ever been down and out, so I have not felt the need to do so. Your poll numbers have remained constant and your base ( although very disappoint­ed with you negotiatin­g at all with the radicallly extreme right wing hostage taking senators ) have been there for you.

As have I.

You are staying the course Sir, that you plotted out even before you were inaugarate­d on that special day of long ago when hope and change were part of the air that we breathed in. On that day, even though America itself was still teetering on the cliff of financial ruin, there was a positive belief in America and ourselves. No matter what lay out there on the horizon, banding together as a singular populace would help make it through.

The political minority that was soundly rebuked by the electorate decided by themselves that the ''American people '' did not want you to govern Sir. They pared down their vocabulary to singular wording and tried to act superior at the same time. Two years went on that they did this Sir, and even though that happened, you enacted a stimilus ...HC reform and a multitude of other things that has put America BACK on the road to greatness.

There is no comeback SIr. You are just staying the course.

Regards,
F_unky

[ennis438]

10:09 AM on 01/06/2011

Slime -coated Republicants can not be expected to approve judicial nominees that are for the American people. They are just too dirty.

[Runruff]

08:45 AM on 01/06/2011

If we end this 40 year old failed War on Drugs, we won't need half the judges already seated.

In another push to confirm judges, Hillary tried to feminize the judiciary. The result was, we got lawyers who were not making a living being appointed as federal circuit judges.

If you care about justice enough to check for you selves, You will see a gang of shoddy self promoting appointees who are currently filling quotas as they are told!


We on the west coast have our most disgraceful judge ever to pound a gavel and create a side industry for herself preying on citizens who do not belong in prison.

You might want to remember the Octo-Mom Judge Ann Aiken-Kolinsky. She is a political animal who will no doubt go places in her department. All successful bureaucrats are master sycophants.

[Word Watcher]

02:50 AM on 01/06/2011

The real problem is the senate's antiquated filibuster rules. A minority can block any action in the senate; in fact, a single senator can put an action on "hold." No wonder the body accomplishes so little compared with the house. Most of President Obama's nominees have majority support, but the majority is powerless because of senate rules. Pressure needs to be applied to senators to change the rules.

[Meldy1]

02:44 AM on 01/06/2011

Good for you Mr.President...use them now ,your massive bully pulpit,it's recommendable.

[Runruff]

08:55 AM on 01/06/2011

Should he, would he, will he, see this is how they direct the conversation away from reality. We don't need more judges the Prison Industrial Complex needs every judge on the job enforcing mandatory minimums.

The real question is why America, the richest country on earth, is also host to more prisoners than all other countries put together. We are over 2.3 million and growing.

We don't need more judges, we need to overhaul the DoJ. WE need to stop incarcerating innocent people!

[hoodydoody]

08:59 AM on 01/06/2011

"WE need to stop incarcerat­ing innocent people!"--for profit!

[disgruntledprogressives]

01:22 AM on 01/06/2011

What's the matter, can't he summon the courage to appoint them as recess apointments?

[historyprof]

01:42 AM on 01/06/2011

Recess appointments only last until the end of a Congressional session (i.e., when Congress adjourns in December every year). Any President making a federal judicial appointment wants the nominee to be confirmed by the Senate so that the judge has a lifetime appointment, rather than just serving for a few months, as would be the case with a recess appointment.

[wrylyfox]

07:12 AM on 01/06/2011

Better to succeed at what you can really get for just a day than to strive for ideological purity that you will never be allowed to have. In the meantime, is justice delayed by crowed courts the same as justice denied? Ask the victims.

[Alex Borland]

08:48 AM on 01/06/2011

He did, indeed, make several before this session started. I forget the exact number, but HP ran an article with their names; I'm sure a quick search would turn it up.

[brokenlink]

11:39 PM on 01/05/2011

Elections have consequences. Executive nominates, senate provides advice and consent. Both branches reflect the will of the people.

[RealistBC]

11:47 PM on 01/05/2011

Hey! I know where that missing Civics book went!

[RealistBC]

11:34 PM on 01/05/2011

So what if Obama renominates these people? He's only giving the GOP 40 more opportunities to show how weak he is and hurting those he presented with another rejection via obstruction.

[docallen001]

06:19 AM on 01/06/2011

Last I looked Obama is the head of the Executive Branch of the Fed Gov. He does not control the Senate, other than the VP can break tie votes. So how in the heck does the obstruction of the nominations by the Repubs Senators show that Obama is weak? Would be more accurate to finger Reed. Maybe if the Senate does some tweaking of Senate Rules, that might help, but I doubt it. Repub goal is to minimize the number of new judges selected by Obama so that when they get WH back (they do plan ahead), they can continue to nominate conservative, corporatist judges.

[huff reader]

08:05 AM on 01/06/2011

Absolutely. But such a move requires Democrat complicity, because the Demos, in turn, could sabotage the Republican nominees. But, being good citizen types, not wanting to destroy the judiciary, and, thus, national civil society, itself, the Demos will cave and allow Repugnut appointments, so the Repugnuts win.

IF the Demos, through some miracle, say, all get a backbone transplant, and DO hold up such Repugnut appointments, then (s) the Repugnuts will howl bloody murder, and (b) the court system will collapse...opening the way to...what? (My suspicion is that an authoritarian coup would ultimately occur, which, apparently, would be just fine with quite a few Repugnuts).

[iceage7]

11:28 PM on 01/05/2011

But how ill this pass with now only 54 dems..Just tell me..And with a hardened opposition willing to say my way or the highway

[RealistBC]

11:48 PM on 01/05/2011

It will only be 54 if Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson, and Joe Lieberman stay on the reservation.

[The Lone Stranger]

11:18 PM on 01/05/2011

Basically President Obama is learning first hand that Machiavelli was right: it is better to be feared than loved. Had President Obama never given a passing thought towards being bipartisan he would be standing on solid ground now and a force that the GOP woulod have to recon with. Instead he's a push over who will do anything the GOP wants to try and make them like him and you know how this ends....it is always to the advantage of the GOP to not budge an inch on anything that matters to them while only occasionally giving ground on trivila matters or matters that public opinion prevents them form block. Either way, Obama has made himself weak and irrelevant.

[muck-raker]

06:17 AM on 01/06/2011

The Lone Stranger excellent post F&F

[Ronnie Avatar Dixon]

11:13 PM on 01/05/2011

The Republicans don't want judges nominated by Obama in order to make him look bad and to increase the odds of laws passed by the 111th Congress getting ruled unconstitutional would be higher, due to less Obama-nominated federal judges.

[huff reader]

08:08 AM on 01/06/2011

Absolutely.

So, if it's OK for them to do this, then it's OK for the Demos to do this, too.

In which case the judiciary collapses without judges to sit at the benches.

End of good old US of A.

[bigOther]

10:52 PM on 01/05/2011

Good for him! Republicans were scared to death of Liu because he is so smart, is not a right winger, and would eventually be a fine Supreme Court nominee.

[groland]

09:58 PM on 01/05/2011

Lets have more of Roberts, Thomas and Scalia, where corporations are citizens but women are not and money equals speech. Kagan was Dean of Harvard law, surely a sign of incompetence according to your brilliant analysis.

Let's git em from Bob Jones college, yee haw.

[1donewrong]

10:03 PM on 01/05/2011

Kaegan never practiced law, she kept military recruiters off the campus contrary to federal law. So having a degree means NOTHING ala her sponsor barak

[groland]

10:07 PM on 01/05/2011

The single most inexperienced supreme court nominee was Clarence Thomas, the only one ever to get a unqualified ranking by the Amercan Bar Associagtion. He is the darling of the right, go figure

[soisay]

10:57 PM on 01/05/2011

One of America's greatest social legal activists replaced by an outright token. Obama needs to find a black, woman, from an historical black college with social fire-in-your-belly and the life experiences that those blue-blood GOP appointees can start reading about in dissenting opinions.

[1donewrong]

12:09 AM on 01/06/2011

The ABA was dropped as a certifying activity due to their blanket partisanship. It would be the same as having rapid dogs and a piece of meat

[Dr Jimmy and Mr Jim]

09:39 PM on 01/05/2011

* Maybe you should nominate 40 CONSERVATIVE Judges.

This would make your fellow Republicans very, very happy... and, well, that's what you're all about, right? Keeping the Republicans happy. Screw your base. What did they ever do for you, anyway?

Give the Repubs what they want. Give the Repubs what they want. Give the Repubs what they want.

We know how you dislike "confrontation" so just find yourself 40 CONSERVATIVE Judges and call it a day.

* See Disclaimer­, below.

* (Disclaime­r: I am NOT a Rite-Wing-­Nuht-Job. I am a very, very, very, very, very disappoint­ed, FORMER Obama supporter.­)

[1donewrong]

09:43 PM on 01/05/2011

How about nominating competent judges that will be a 1st for him

[bayguy13]

10:30 PM on 01/05/2011

As opposed to who, judge Roberts (who has been taped going to partisan fundraisers).

[soitgoes12]

10:38 PM on 01/05/2011

Like Harriet Miers?

[WhinerX49er]

11:04 PM on 01/05/2011

Nut jobs are nut jobs - I don't particularly care whether they are from the left or right wing.

Even if you're speaking truth, your anti-Obama rants serve no one and nothing - especially the left wing policies you supposedly support. While imperfect, (as is any human, especially one elected to political office) Obama is the most progressive president in my lifetime. You might be unhappy with the legislation ultimately passed during the 111 Congress, but the reality is Obama and Dems made historical strides on the progressive agenda in just two crisis-filled years. Read a history book or two and prove me wrong.

Had Left-Wing-Nuht-Jobs spent less time criticizing Obama and more time criticizing Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats, the Tea-Party Death Panel liars and their accomplices in the lazy drive-by media, Obama and the Dems may have been even more successful. If they, you, had worked as hard to maintain the Dem majorities as you did to attain them, we wouldn't even have to play, "what might have been."

But instead of doing the hard work of maintaining legislative majorities, of passing legislation, of governing, you'll complain and complain and complain.....

Back stabber.

[alephnull]

01:20 AM on 01/06/2011

Preach it

[Dr Jimmy and Mr Jim]

08:40 PM on 01/06/2011

Back Stabber? Name Calling? That’s alright. I can take it. Consider this:
The GW Bush Administration has abused our Constitution and our legal system in ways once never thought possible. Firing US Attorneys for NOT investigating Democrats, making Alberto Gonzalez Attorney General, outing a CIA Operative and commuting I. Scooter Libby’s sentence, Warrantless Wire-tapping of Americans, and on and on and on. This is a new level of corruption. I voted for Obama because I bought into the “hope and change” rhetoric. I expected him to be tough and fight Republicans and undo some of the damage the Bush Administration did to our country. I NEVER expected him to NOT fight at all. Cave in on Public Option Healthcare or Single Payer Healthcare without even trying.
My anti-Obama rants serve no one and nothing? I disagree. Perhaps I could convince some folks to consider a REAL Democrat in the next election or even an Independent. What if Bernie Sanders decided to run? We do NOT have to stand by and be lied to by a Democrat that is going to extend tax cuts to the very wealthy.
I will do more than complain. I will vote for someone else. Things are bad and getting worse. These new Republicans are going to take away Social Security, bust up the last remaining unions, etc. We need a REAL Democrat to run against these dangerous people. We don’t need a bipartisan fooool.

[groland]

09:39 PM on 01/05/2011

based on the comments here, there is a sense that blocking nominees has been a bipartisan effort. Nothing is further from the truth. Bush 2 had a record number of vacancies to fill because many of CLintons were on hold. The Dems in the Senate did not block these. Obamas appointments are not even getting hearings in committee, they do not even get a vote. We are still hearing about Robert Bork, who I must remind conservatives, did get a vote in committee, 9-5 against. Today, nominees are on hod because 1 senator has a problem and does not even have the courtesy top explain his opposition. So no, judicial nominee poitics is not a bipartisan problem. The GOP has been overwhelmingly hostile to nominees from Clnton and Obama.

Lets also remember that the GOP had 7-9 supreme court picks for years (until Sotomayor) and still they were complaining about the court. They are only concerned with the outcome not with the legality or the constitutional basis.

[1donewrong]

09:44 PM on 01/05/2011

most of his nominees have never practiced law maybe the problem

[groland]

10:05 PM on 01/05/2011

Lets see the very first person i looked up is chief public defender in Norfolk. That is practicing law; she has been licensed in VA for 18 years. The second was a practicing lawyer for 19 years before being appointed judge.

You are just an ignorant , please crawl back under your rock!

[elmundo6]

10:11 PM on 01/05/2011

You mean like Scalia, who practiced only a few years before a long career in academia. Give me a break. The problem is this is president Obama (a former law professor).