Monday, March 11, 2013

Cadish Withdraws Her Nomination To Federal Bench

As some of you have already observed and commented on other posts, it was widely reported Friday that Judge Elissa Cadish withdrew her nomination to the federal bench. According to an article from the AP, her reasoning was a hope that a speedy nomination for someone else would take place by withdrawing hers. She also mentioned the fact that she plans to run for re-election in Clark County in 2014 and the federal judicial nominee code of conduct (who knew) advises nominees to refrain from political activity.

In the comments to this opinion piece from Steve Sebelius of the RJ, some readers opined that the current system where a senator from the nominee's state (by refusing to sign the blue slip) can block the approval process is a good thing and served a vital role in this instance. However, Sebelius suggests that it is time to do away with this privilege that puts one person's opinion ahead of everyone else. Do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing? Does it give a senator too much power in the nomination process?

While we appreciate Judge Cadish (ostensibly) showing concern for the citizens of Nevada by withdrawing her nomination, it raises some other concerns. Was it a mistake for Cadish to answer that survey question like she did? Is there a better way to select judges (appointment, maybe)? What will happen to Jennie Dorsey's nomination (although Andrew Gordon is expected to be confirmed soon, Dorsey is still waiting for Senator Heller to sign the blue slip to start the process for her)? Has Dorsey done something like Cadish to cause Senator Heller to hold up the process or is Senator Heller simply a sexist?

Finally, if anyone has any insight in to how Judge Cadish decided it was time to withdraw her nomination (was it of her own accord or did Senator Reid tell her it's time), we would love to hear what you know.

6 comments:

  1. I suspect that Judge Cadish was told that Harry couldn't cut a deal with Heller and that's why she withdrew. Too bad. She is a principled, smart and hardworking judge. The federal bench needs her.

    I am sure she regrets answering the question at all. She is probably one of the few candidates who actually had thought about the constitutional question. Until the Heller decision, a number of people shared her legal view, including a number of federal judges.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Navarro, Sandoval, and Rawlinson all easily skated through the confirmation process and Cadish can't even get a hearing? What's wrong with this picture?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I just happened upon the new law school rankings--sorry, not the Cooley rankings.

    http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings

    ReplyDelete
  4. Of course hindsight is 20/20, but could have been an easy out for her on the questionnaire by answering something like (1) that she didn't want to answer on the grounds that a similar matter could come before her or (2) her rulings would comply with all applicable state and federal court rulings.

    It's too bad she probably would have been great on the federal level.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Congrats Andy Gordon on being confirmed.

    http://www.lvrj.com/news/gordon-confirmed-as-federal-judge-197237411.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hate to see a jerk like Heller win on this one. She's have been an exceptional Federal judge. What a shame.

    ReplyDelete