Snow impacting Indiana nomination hearings

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

If snow doesn't get in the way, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee may discuss on Thursday morning three Indiana federal judicial nominees and the long-delayed nomination of a Bloomington law professor for the Department of Justice.

Committee members are set to meet at 10 a.m. on pending executive branch nominations, including the controversial choice of Dawn Johnsen to lead the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel. The president tapped her in early 2009, but after a year of delay she is now going through the confirmation process again from the start. Her nomination was set for discussion a week ago, but senators left a meeting before her vote and postponed it. She is first on the agenda for this week.

Committee members are scheduled to begin discussions at 11:30 a.m. on six judicial nominations - including Jon DeGuilio for the Northern District of Indiana, and U.S. Magistrate Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson and Marion Superior Judge Tanya Walton Pratt for two Southern District of Indiana openings. The White House announced the trio's nominations on Jan. 18.

The judiciary committee had planned to meet at 4 p.m. today on the judicial nominations, but the continuing snow emergency in Washington, D.C., cancelled the meeting. Both the Senate and House of Representatives have suspended votes this week because of the massive snowstorm hitting the district, which not only caused many national landmarks and federal government closings but is also creating problems for legislators trying to get to the area from their home districts.

The weather could cause even more delays and postponements on Thursday if the Senate Judiciary Committee can't get a quorum for the meeting, according to Erica Chabot, spokeswoman for committee chair Sen. Pat Leahy, D-Vt. But by early afternoon today, the meeting was still expected to happen, she said. If it happens, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., will preside.

If the nominations aren't discussed this week, legislators won't get to them until after the weeklong Presidents Day break that begins Monday. Some have speculated that President Barack Obama could make some recess appointments to get around the Senate confirmation hearings temporarily, but it's unclear whether that would happen or which nominees might be considered.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.