WASHINGTON (CN) — It was business as usual in the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday as lawmakers sparred over a laundry list of federal court nominees, some of whom drew harsh rebukes from the panel’s Republican contingent.
The upper chamber’s legal affairs panel — charged with approving the White House’s appointees for vacancies in the federal judiciary — advanced 20 district and circuit court nominees, as well as an appointment to the Biden administration’s intellectual property enforcement office, during the marathon business meeting.
Despite smoldering partisan tensions that boiled over during Thursday’s meeting, several of the nominees cleared the committee on a bipartisan basis. Some of that flickering cross-aisle cooperation is thanks to Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin’s support for a longstanding Senate tradition known as blue slipping, said Texas Senator John Cornyn during opening remarks.
“I commend the fact that you recognize the blue slip,” Cornyn told the Illinois Democrat, “and today's markup is a testament to cooperation from my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle.”
Durbin has long defended blue slips, which allow senators to weigh in on nominees for their home states. Critics of the process, however, have said that the privilege allows lawmakers to obstruct the White House’s judicial agenda by blocking appointments on a political basis.
On Thursday, Cornyn pushed back on that contention, pointing to his and his colleagues’ cooperation with Democrats this Congress.
“There would be no basis to change the current policy,” he said. “Some of the radical factions on the left want to blow up every institutional norm … but as you know, it’s an important institution and prerogative to have home state senators weigh in on judicial nominees.”
Bipartisan support for blue slipping was about where the political good feelings ended, however, as committee Republicans ripped into several of the White House’s appointments.
Among those nominees was Adeel Mangi, who the Biden administration has tapped to fill a vacancy on the Third Circuit. GOP lawmakers have previously criticized Mangi for time he spent on the advisory board of the Center for Security, Race and Rights at Rutgers University.
During a December confirmation hearing, Republicans demanded that the nominee explain anti-Israel statements from program leaders and answer for a 2021 event held by the center, which featured remarks from an academic scholar who was indicted but never convicted of racketeering for an Islamist militant group.
Mangi maintained that he was not aware of the event at the time and that his work on the advisory board was limited to annual meetings about academic topics.
Despite that, Republicans on Thursday doubled down on their criticism.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz acknowledged that it was possible Mangi hadn’t heard of the 2021 event, which coincided with the 20-year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, before it happened.
“But you know what he didn’t do,” the lawmaker said. “He didn’t resign after it happened. He didn’t say: ‘Whoa, I didn’t know that this is what you guys were doing.’”
Cruz also pointed to Mangi’s continued participation on the advisory board — he was a member from 2019 to 2023 — and thousands of dollars in donations made to the center by the nominee and his law firm.
“He didn’t denounce any of this,” the Texas Republican said.
Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn cited an op-ed published Wednesday in the Washington Times which referred to Mangi as “Hamas’ favorite judicial nominee.” The article’s header photo features a doctored image of the nominee’s face, his eyes obscured by the Hamas flag.
Blackburn argued that Mangi was not only on the Rutgers program’s advisory board but that he was also “actively participating with that center.”
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
