Bold Justice: May 7, 2018

## Contents

* 1 Bold Justice: And we wait
* 1.1 We #SCOTUS, so you don’t have to
* 1.2 SCOTUS trivia
* 1.3 Federal court action
* 1.3.1 Confirmations
* 1.3.2 Nominations
* 1.3.3 Vacancies
* 1.3.4 Committee action
* 1.4 A judge you oughta know
* 1.5 Looking ahead
* 1.6 Why subscribe to Bold Justice?
* 2 Archive
* 2.1 2021
* 2.2 2020
* 2.3 2019
* 2.4 2018
* 2.5 2017
* 2.6 Why Bold Justice?

## Bold Justice: And we wait

And still we wait for more opinions from the Supreme Court! While we wait, let’s take another look at some of the biggest cases of the term. Off we go!

### We #SCOTUS, so you don’t have to

Arguments for the October 2017 term have concluded, and we all have a chance to catch our collective court-watcher breath for a moment. In total, the Supreme Court heard argument in 69 cases this term, all of which you can track on our term overview page. Of those 69, the court has issued opinions in 24. The court usually issues the remainder of its opinions by the end of June.

This week, let’s take a closer look at a theme of this term: Redistricting. The court heard three major redistricting cases this year:

* In October, the court heard Gill v. Whitford. In 2011, Wisconsin adopted a plan for state legislative district boundaries, Act 43, under which elections to the Wisconsin state legislature were held during the 2012, 2014, and 2016 election cycles. The petitioners, 12 registered Democrats in Wisconsin, alleged that the redistricting plan intentionally and systematically diluted the voting strength of Democratic voters statewide in elections to the state legislature, resulting in an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. A divided three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, convened under 28 U.S.C. §2284, agreed with the petitioners and invalidated Act 43. The Supreme Court of the United States prevented enforcement of that decision pending arguments before the court on the merits.
* Next, in March, the court heard Benisek v. Lamone. Seven Republicans, all of whom lived and voted in Maryland's Sixth Congressional District prior to its reconfiguration in the 2010 redistricting cycle, claim that state lawmakers altered the boundaries of the 6th District in order to dilute the impact of Republican votes. The plaintiffs allege that this action was deliberate and effective, constituting a violation of their First Amendment right to protection from official retaliation for political beliefs. A district court judge rejected the plaintiffs’ claims, and the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed.
* Finally, in April, the court heard two consolidated cases, both captioned Abbott v. Perez. In August 2017, a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas issued two rulings finding that Texas' 2013 maps for congressional districts 27 and 35 and nine state House districts had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent, unconstitutionally diluting the impact of racial minority votes in those districts. The appellants (state officials) disputed these rulings on both procedural and substantive grounds and appealed the decisions to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Stay tuned for updates in all three redistricting cases and the other remaining opinions.

Wondering where the cases came from this term? Check out this chart showing the number of appeals from each lower court:

### SCOTUS trivia

On the current Supreme Court, the vast majority of justices served on one of the courts of appeal before their nominations. In fact, only one of the current justices was not nominated directly from a court of appeals. Which justice is it?

* Clarence Thomas
* Sonia Sotomayor
* Elena Kagan
* John Roberts

Choose an answer to find out!

### Federal court action

#### Confirmations

The Senate did not confirm any additional nominees this week.

#### Nominations

President Trump did not announce any additional nominees this week.

#### Vacancies

There are currently 148 vacancies in the federal judiciary. Of those 148 vacancies, 80 have no nominee as of yet during President Trump’s administration. According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts and other outlets, an additional 32 judges have announced their intention to leave active judicial status during Trump’s first term. There are 72 pending nominations to seats tracked by Ballotpedia’s Federal Vacancy Count. Check out the chart below to see vacancies of four years or more:

#### Committee action

The Senate Judiciary Committee did not meet last week.

The Committee is scheduled to meet on May 9 and May 10 next week to consider additional nominees.

Love judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancies information? We figured. Our monthly Federal Vacancy Count, which is published on the last Wednesday of every month, monitors all of the faces, places, and spaces moving in, moving out, and moving on in the federal judiciary.

Need a daily fix? Our Federal Vacancy Warning System’s got you covered with continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.

Or, if you prefer, we maintain a list of individuals nominated by President Trump.

### A judge you oughta know

Every week, we at Ballotpedia want to highlight a federal judge or judicial nominee. We’re taking a closer look at circuit court judges. This week, let’s get to know Jeffrey R. Howard, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. He joined the court in 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush. A native of Claremont, New Hampshire, Howard graduated from Plymouth State College with his bachelor's degree in 1978, and later graduated from Georgetown University Law Center with his J.D. in 1981.

### Looking ahead

Here’s what we’re looking ahead to this week:

* We expect the U.S. Supreme Court to release orders and possibly new opinions.
* We expect the Senate Judiciary Committee to meet to consider additional nominees.

### Why subscribe to Bold Justice?[edit]

Stay on top of the whirlwind world of the federal judiciary

Email *

First Name

Please complete the Captcha above

Need to stay on top of the whirlwind world of the federal judiciary of the United States?

Join us, counsel, as we lay the foundation for what happened this week in the world of federal courts. Our record will reflect the cases SCOTUS heard, which judges retired, which were nominated, and what important rulings come out of other federal courts. Call us as your next witness and get the most in-depth coverage of federal courts available to your inbox. Subscribe for free today.

Ballotpedia has been providing new areas of coverage, performing in-depth analyses, and developing new tools to help keep our readers in the know since 2006. This is one more resource to keep you informed—one that can be delivered to your inbox once a week.

## Archive[edit]

### 2021[edit]

* Bold Justice: November 1, 2021
* Bold Justice: October 12, 2021
* Bold Justice: October 4, 2021
* Bold Justice: September 13, 2021
* Bold Justice: August 9, 2021
* Bold Justice: July 19, 2021
* Bold Justice: July 12, 2021
* Bold Justice: June 7, 2021
* Bold Justice: May 10, 2021
* Bold Justice: May 3, 2021
* Bold Justice: April 26, 2021
* Bold Justice: April 19, 2021
* Bold Justice: April 12, 2021
* Bold Justice: March 29, 2021
* Bold Justice: March 22, 2021
* Bold Justice: March 8, 2021
* Bold Justice: March 1, 2021
* Bold Justice: February 22, 2021
* Bold Justice: February 8, 2021
* Bold Justice: January 18, 2021
* Bold Justice: January 11, 2021

### 2020[edit]

* Bold Justice: December 7, 2020
* Bold Justice: November 9, 2020
* Bold Justice: November 2, 2020
* Bold Justice: October 12, 2020
* Bold Justice: October 5, 2020
* Bold Justice: September 30, 2020
* Bold Justice: September 14, 2020
* Bold Justice: August 10, 2020
* Bold Justice: August 3, 2020
* Bold Justice: July 13, 2020
* Bold Justice: June 29, 2020
* Bold Justice: June 22, 2020
* Bold Justice: June 8, 2020
* Bold Justice: May 11, 2020
* Bold Justice: May 4, 2020
* Bold Justice: April 6, 2020
* Bold Justice: March 23, 2020
* Bold Justice: March 9, 2020
* Bold Justice: March 2, 2020
* Bold Justice: February 24, 2020
* Bold Justice: February 10, 2020
* Bold Justice: January 20, 2020
* Bold Justice: January 13, 2020

### 2019[edit]

* Bold Justice: December 9, 2019
* Bold Justice: December 2, 2019
* Bold Justice: November 12, 2019
* Bold Justice: November 4, 2019
* Bold Justice: October 14, 2019
* Bold Justice: October 7, 2019
* Bold Justice: September 9, 2019
* Bold Justice: August 5, 2019
* Bold Justice: July 1, 2019
* Bold Justice: June 17, 2019
* Bold Justice: June 3, 2019
* Bold Justice: May 20, 2019
* Bold Justice: May 6, 2019
* Bold Justice: April 29, 2019
* Bold Justice: April 22, 2019
* Bold Justice: April 15, 2019
* Bold Justice: April 1, 2019
* Bold Justice: March 25, 2019
* Bold Justice: March 18, 2019
* Bold Justice: February 25, 2019
* Bold Justice: February 18, 2019
* Bold Justice: January 21, 2019
* Bold Justice: January 14, 2019
* Bold Justice: January 7, 2019

### 2018[edit]

* Bold Justice: December 3, 2018
* Bold Justice: November 26, 2018
* Bold Justice: November 5, 2018
* Bold Justice: October 29, 2018
* Bold Justice: October 8, 2018
* Bold Justice: October 1, 2018
* Bold Justice: September 6, 2018
* Bold Justice: August 6, 2018
* Bold Justice: July 2, 2018
* Bold Justice: June 25, 2018
* Bold Justice: June 18, 2018
* Bold Justice: June 11, 2018
* Bold Justice: June 4, 2018
* Bold Justice: May 21, 2018
* Bold Justice: May 14, 2018
* Bold Justice: April 30, 2018
* Bold Justice: April 23, 2018
* Bold Justice: April 16, 2018
* Bold Justice: April 9, 2018
* Bold Justice: April 2, 2018
* Bold Justice: March 26, 2018
* Bold Justice: March 19, 2018
* Bold Justice: March 12, 2018
* Bold Justice: March 5, 2018
* Bold Justice: February 12, 2018
* Bold Justice: January 29, 2018
* Bold Justice: January 22, 2018
* Bold Justice: January 15, 2018
* Bold Justice: January 8, 2018

### 2017[edit]

* Bold Justice: December 18, 2017
* Bold Justice: December 11, 2017
* Bold Justice: December 4, 2017
* Bold Justice: November 27, 2017
* Bold Justice: November 20, 2017
* Bold Justice: November 13, 2017
* Bold Justice: November 6, 2017
* Bold Justice: October 30, 2017

### Why Bold Justice?[edit]

Well, there’s a story behind it, and we’re happy to credit Justice Samuel Alito for the inspiration. Back in October of 2014, Justice Alito joined his fellow Supreme Court Yale Law alumni, Justices Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor, for a panel as part of the law school’s alumni weekend (video below). During the discussion, the moderator asked the audience if they could guess which of the three justices on the panel served as the inspiration for a coffee house to name one of their blends of coffee, Bold Justice. Justice Alito responded, “Obviously, it’s me.”

He went on to tell the story of how, during his days as a Third Circuit judge, his law clerks participated in a Newark, New Jersey, coffee shop’s year-long promotion wherein if customers sampled every blend for one year, the customers could then create and name a blend of coffee. Justice Alito described Bold Justice as a blend that was “designed for about three o’clock in the afternoon if you’re working and you’re starting to fall asleep, if you have this, it will jolt you awake.” A blend of courts and coffee: sounds perfect to us!

v • e

Ballotpedia coverage by project

Federal|

U.S. President • Executive Branch • Legislative Branch • U.S. Senate • U.S. House • Judicial Branch • SCOTUS

State|

State Executive Officials • State Legislatures • State Courts • State Ballot Measures • Recalls

Local|

Municipal Government • School Boards • Local Courts • Local Ballot Measures • Recalls • Expanded local election coverage

Policy|

Administrative State • Budgets • Civil liberties • Education • Elections • Energy • Environment • Finance • Healthcare • Immigration • Pensions

News|

The Daily Brew • Ballotpedia's Polling Indexes • Scott Rasmussen's Number of the Day

Indexes|

Index of Contents • Index of Terms