ILNews

Reports: Trump to nominate Notre Dame professor to 7th Circuit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

President Donald Trump reportedly plans to nominate Notre Dame Law School professor Amy Coney Barrett to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Barrett would take the Indiana seat on the Chicago-based appellate court left vacant by the retirement of former Circuit Judge John Tinder in February 2015. Trump’s plans to nominate Barrett were reported by news services and legal websites, including the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and ABA Journal.

Barrett has been a professor at Notre Dame since 2002. Prior, she worked in private practice and clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and Judge Laurence Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Former President Barack Obama nominated Myra Selby to the seat, but Selby, an Ice Miller LLP partner and former Indiana Supreme Court justice, never received a hearing from the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Barrett and Notre Dame Law School officials could not immediately be reached for comment Monday. Republican Sen. Todd Young said in a statement, “I could not be more pleased with the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the federal bench. During the vetting process, I had the chance to interview Mrs. Barrett and expressed to the White House my belief that she would be a home run pick. I’m glad the President views her with as much regard as I do. With this selection, President Trump continues to demonstrate a knack for nominating individuals to the federal bench who will faithfully interpret the Constitution of the United States. Mrs. Barrett’s qualifications should make for a swift, bipartisan confirmation process.”

Democratic Sen. Joe Donnelly's office is waiting for the announcement by Trump before commenting.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT