ILNews

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.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT