WASHINGTON (CN) — A federal judge seeking a promotion to the appellate bench got a partisan grilling Wednesday as Republicans dialed in on what they framed as a significant backlog of cases under her watch.
Nancy Maldonado, currently a judge on the Northern of District of Illinois, went before the Senate Judiciary Committee as the Biden administration’s pick to fill a vacancy on the Seventh Circuit, the federal appeals court which takes on cases from Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana.
Maldonado, confirmed by the Senate to her current role in 2022 on a bipartisan vote, would be the first Hispanic woman to serve on the Seventh Circuit.
While her last nomination garnered some cross-aisle consensus, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee were quick Wednesday to question whether Maldonado should be promoted to the federal appeals circuit.
South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, the panel’s ranking member, noted that the nominee had a backlog of around 125 pending motions in cases under her jurisdiction. That figure represents “the third highest number of pending motions of anybody nominated for the district court in this Congress,” Graham said.
Louisiana Senator John Kennedy piled on, calling Maldonado “probably the least productive member” of her court.
“You have 125 motions pending that you declined to decide,” Kennedy said, adding that the nominee has the seventh highest number of pending motions out of any current district court judge. “You really think of all the other district judges in the Seventh Circuit, you’re the one that will be promoted?”
Maldonado explained that she was assigned roughly 300 pending cases when she joined the district bench in 2022 and that she had since whittled that down “to a reasonable number.”
“I am very careful with my decision-making,” she told lawmakers. “I want the parties to understand why they won or lost.”
The nominee also said the Northern District of Illinois had experienced a lot of turnover, noting the court lost two judges during her first three months on the bench, and that the Covid-19 pandemic further hampered rulings.
Kennedy, who has been consistently critical of Biden administration court nominees, didn’t appear satisfied with Maldonado’s explanation — calling her record “abysmal.”
“It costs a lot of money to litigate,” he said, “and people are paying lawyers and time is money.”
Maldonado told the Louisiana Republican that she stood by her record. “I just came at a very difficult time in the courts,” she said.
Meanwhile, Judiciary Committee Republicans attempted to tie Maldonado to left-leaning judicial activists and political causes.
Recalling the nominee’s last confirmation hearing for the Illinois district court, Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn questioned Maldonado about her relationship with Christopher Kang, chief counsel at progressive legal advocacy group Demand Justice.
Blackburn pointed out that Demand Justice has previously advocated for expanding the Supreme Court — a no-go for GOP lawmakers — and demanded to know whether Maldonado had spoken with Kang on the subject.
The nominee rejected the notion, arguing that her interactions with Kang were limited to “getting advice and guidance on how the nomination process worked.” Citing judicial rules, she declined to comment further on proposals to expand the high court.
“I have never taken any position on this,” Maldonado told Blackburn. “I don’t think it’s appropriate to opine on it.”
Kennedy pressed the nominee on a 2012 amicus brief filed by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence as part of an Illinois state lawsuit challenging a county-level ban on assault weapons. Although the lawmaker contended that Maldonado had written the brief, she clarified that she had only worked with the Brady Center as local counsel.
Graham also grilled Maldonado about a statement published by Chicago law firm Miner, Barnhill and Galland, where she was previously a partner, responding to the 2020 police killing of George Floyd. The South Carolina senator pointed out that the statement condemned former President Donald Trump “and others that have fomented division, violence and animus in our country.”
Graham suggested that Maldonado had written that statement as well — but she denied doing so. The firm’s 2020 statement, still available on their website, is attributed to “the attorneys and legal professionals of Miner, Barnhill & Galland,” but Maldonado’s name does not appear.
New Jersey Senator Cory Booker pushed back on his colleagues’ framing of the statement, calling it “a stretch” to hold Maldonado accountable “for things that other folks wrote, even if they were part of the same organization.”
The Judiciary Committee also considered Wednesday a tranche of district court nominees, including White House picks for the Northern District of Illinois and the D.C. district court, as well as two appointments to the District of Arizona.
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
California certifies March 5 primary election results April 12, 2024 -
