ILNews

Banking attorney confirmed as federal judge

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


The Hoosier legal community has its newest federal judge in the Northern District of Indiana, and now two others up for judgeships in the state’s Southern District await their votes before the full U.S. Senate.

Senators turned away briefly from financial reform Tuesday evening to unanimously confirm by a voice vote the nomination of Jon E. DeGuilio for an Article III judgeship. Spokespersons for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Indiana’s Sen. Evan Bayh both confirmed the vote came just after 5 p.m.

DeGuilio succeeds the late U.S. Judge Allen Sharp, who’d served as a senior judge from November 2007 until his death last summer.

“I’m very honored, and this has been a very exciting process,” DeGuilio told Indiana Lawyer by phone today.

He said he watched his confirmation on C-Span 2 after receiving a call earlier that day from Bayh’s office about a nearing vote.

President Barack Obama chose DeGuilio for the judicial post in January, and his nomination got the green light from the Senate Judiciary Committee in March. With his confirmation, DeGuilio will step down as legal counsel of Peoples Bank in Munster. Prior to his current position, DeGuilio had served as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana from 1993 to 1999 and had previously served as a prosecuting attorney and a public defender in Lake County. He also had served as former president of the Hammond City Council and the sheriff’s office legal advisor in the 1980s. He graduated from the Valparaiso University School of Law in 1981.

During the initial confirmation hearing, Bayh praised the man he had jointly recommended for the judge post with Republican Sen. Richard Lugar last year.

“Jon DeGuilio is a dedicated public servant with a firm commitment to applying our country’s laws fairly and faithfully,” Bayh said. “He possesses the highest ethical standards and has extensive experience in federal court. I am confident he will serve the people of Indiana with distinction and help ensure the speedy and efficient administration of justice for all our citizens.”

DeGuilio planned to speak with Chief Judge Philip Simon and Judge Robert Miller today about logistics, but generally he expects the president’s signing of his commission to happen pretty quickly.

Chief Judge Simon said the court was excited to finally have a new judge for the federal bench there. The court hasn’t yet analyzed the existing caseloads to determine what DeGuilio will receive once he starts on the bench, but the chief judge said the new jurist will be assigned to the South Bend division where Judge Sharp had presided. He added he wants to give DeGuilio about a month to get his feet wet before filling his docket.

“We’re all just very happy and delighted to get him on board,” Chief Judge Simon said, noting that he once worked for DeGuilio in the ’90s in the U.S. Attorney’s Office. “He’s very pleasant to work with and a good man, and he’s going to be a terrific addition.”

Meanwhile, the legal community awaits the full votes on Indiana’s two other pending judicial nominations – announced at the same time as DeGuilio ­– U.S. Magistrate Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson and Marion Superior Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, who are nominated for spots in the Southern District of Indiana.

Some within the legal community had speculated that Monday’s nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court of the United States might slow the state’s pending judicial picks. That turned out to not be the case for DeGuilio, though. Bayh’s spokesman Brian Weiss said Tuesday evening he wasn’t sure when the full Senate might schedule votes on Judges Magnus-Stinson or Walton Pratt, but he said it could come quickly if senators reach an agreement for an up or down vote.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. @ President Snow, like they really read these comments or have the GUTS to show what is the right thing to do. They are just worrying about planning the next retirement party, the others JUST DO NOT CARE about what is right. Its the Good Ol'Boys - they do not care about the rights of the mother or child, they just care about their next vote, which, from what I gather, the mother left the state of Indiana because of the domestic violence that was going on through out the marriage, the father had three restraining orders on him from three different women, but yet, the COA judges sent a strong message, go ahead men put your women in place, do what you have to do, you have our backs... I just wish the REAL truth could be told about this situation... Please pray for this child and mother that God will some how make things right and send a miracle from above.

  2. I hear you.... Us Christians are the minority. The LGBTs groups have more rights than the Christians..... How come when we express our faith openly in public we are prosecuted? This justice system do not want to seem "bias" but yet forgets who have voted them into office.

  3. Perhaps the lady chief justice, or lady appellate court chief judge, or one of the many female federal court judges in Ind could lead this discussion of gender disparity? THINK WITH ME .... any real examples of race or gender bias reported on this ezine? But think about ADA cases ... hmmmm ... could it be that the ISC actually needs to tighten its ADA function instead? Let's ask me or Attorney Straw. And how about religion? Remember it, it used to be right up there with race, and actually more protected than gender. Used to be. Patrick J Buchanan observes: " After World War II, our judicial dictatorship began a purge of public manifestations of the “Christian nation” Harry Truman said we were. In 2009, Barack Obama retorted, “We do not consider ourselves to be a Christian nation.” Secularism had been enthroned as our established religion, with only the most feeble of protests." http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/is-secession-a-solution-to-cultural-war/#q3yVdhxDVMMxiCmy.99 I could link to any of my supreme court filings here, but have done that more than enough. My case is an exclamation mark on what PJB writes. BUT not in ISC, where the progressives obsess on race and gender .... despite a lack of predicate acts in the past decade. Interested in reading more on this subject? Search for "Florida" on this ezine.

  4. Great questions to six jurists. The legislature should open a probe to investigate possible government corruption. Cj rush has shown courage as has justice Steven David. Who stands with them?

  5. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

ADVERTISEMENT