Trump appellate court nominee defends experience at US Senate hearing
Whitney Hermandorfer is nominated to 6th Circuit
*
Democrats question Hermandorfer on her experience, birthright citizenship case
*
Four Missouri nominees also were considered
June 4 - A former clerk to three conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices who was chosen by President Donald Trump to become a federal appeals court judge faced questions from U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday about her youth and her support of the Republican president's order curtailing birthright citizenship.
Whitney Hermandorfer, 37, tapped to serve on the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, defended her record at the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee's first hearing on judicial nominees since Trump returned to office in January.
"The cases have come fast and furiously, and I've been privileged to handle a number of nationally significant matters," Hermandorfer, a lawyer serving under Tennessee's Republican attorney general, said.
The hearing comes as judges in dozens of cases have slowed or blocked some of Trump's initiatives to dramatically expand presidential authority and slash the federal bureaucracy, prompting calls from Trump and his allies for judges to be impeached or accusing them of being part of a "judicial coup."
Hermandorfer is the first of Trump's 11 judicial nominees so far to appear before the Republican panel, as the White House looks to further reshape a judiciary whose members have stymied key parts of his agenda. Four nominees to serve as trial court judges in Missouri appeared before the panel later on Wednesday.
Trump shifted the ideological balance of the judiciary to the right in his first term with a near-record 234 appointments, including three members of the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority.
Hermandorfer clerked for Justices Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett, and clerked for Justice Brett Kavanaugh while he was a judge on a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C.
Today, she heads a strategic litigation unit in Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti's office, where she has defended the state's near-total abortion ban and challenged a rule adopted under former Democratic President Joe Biden barring discrimination against transgender students.
Republican senators appeared likely to advance her nomination to the full Senate for its consideration, even as Democrats raised questions about the positions she'd taken in court and the 37-year-old's level of experience just a decade out of law school.
"I am concerned about the striking brevity of your professional record," Democratic Senator Chris Coons said.
He noted that the American Bar Association had long had a standard deeming judicial nominees qualified only if they had at least 12 years of experience.
Several Democrats criticized the Trump administration for deciding last week to cut off the legal organization's decades-old ability to vet judicial nominees as part of its ratings process. Republicans welcomed the move, accusing the nonpartisan group of bias against conservatives.
Hermandorfer said that while as an appellate lawyer she had never tried a case to a jury verdict, she had litigated over 100 appellate cases and argued four federal appeals.
"That sounds like quite a bit of experience," Republican Senator Josh Hawley said.
Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the committee, questioned Hermandorfer on a recent brief she filed on behalf of the state of Tennessee to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the Trump administration's bid to let his executive order on birthright citizenship to take effect.
Trump's order directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is a citizen or lawful permanent resident.
The Supreme Court is weighing whether to narrow nationwide injunctions blocking enforcement of that order that were issued by three judges who concluded it clearly violated the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.
Hermandorfer told Durbin that her office felt the justices should be provided information about evidence that she said showed that the 14th Amendment as originally interpreted after it was ratified in 1868 called into question whether the constitutionality of Trump's order was an "open and shut case."
"I stand by completely those arguments and the historical sources that we advanced to the court," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fibre2Fashion
10 minutes ago
- Fibre2Fashion
Trump's penalty talks create unease in Indian textile industry
In what many see as a major escalation of trade tensions, US President Donald Trump on July 30 announced a sweeping 25 per cent tariff on all goods imported from India even as India's competitors, including Pakistan, Vietnam, Bangladesh and Turkiye, were levied lower tariffs of 15-20 per cent. The move has sparked concerns across sectors in India, especially after Trump also mentioned of an additional, unspecified penalty related to India's ongoing trade relations with Russia, specifically its purchases of crude oil. US President Donald Trump announced a 25 per cent tariff on all Indian imports. The move is compounded by Trump's warning of an unspecified penalty tied to India's ongoing trade relations with Russia, particularly its purchase of crude oil. The lack of clarity around the unspecified penalty has created unease in Indian business circles, especially among apparel exporters. While the announcement was made without detailing the nature of the additional penalty, industry leaders and policymakers are concerned over its ramifications and long-term implications. Reacting to the latest development, India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry issued an official response, as reported by various media outlets. The statement emphasised that the Indian Government is closely examining the implications of the US President's announcement. 'The Government is studying its implications. India and the US have been engaged in negotiations on concluding a fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement over the last few months. We remain committed to that objective,' the ministry reportedly underlined. The statement also reassured stakeholders that national interests would be protected. 'The Government attaches the utmost importance to protecting and promoting the welfare of our farmers, entrepreneurs, and MSMEs. The Government will take all steps necessary to secure our national interest, as has been the case with other trade agreements, including the latest Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the UK,' the ministry reportedly added. Adding another dimension, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, just a day after Trump's tariff announcement, underlined Washington's dissatisfaction with India's continuing imports from Russia, as reported in certain sections of the media. 'India's purchase of oil from Russia is most certainly a point of irritation,' Rubio reportedly said speaking to a radio channel. Experts are thus viewing Trump's tariff imposition not just through the lens of protectionism, but as part of a broader geopolitical agenda. Some analysts believe the punitive measures reflect the US' discomfort with India's increasing strategic autonomy and its deepening economic engagement with Russia. Of particular concern to Indian exporters is the ambiguity surrounding the 'unspecified penalty' mentioned by Trump. The lack of clarity on this additional measure has created unease in the business circles. Sudhir Sekhri, chairman of the Apparel Export Promotion Council (AEPC) , reflected this sentiment, stating, 'The penalty is a grey area, and we hope the Government of India (GOI) will negotiate this with the US…' Echoing similar concerns, Rajeev Gupta, joint managing director of RSWM Ltd, earlier told Fibre2Fashion , 'Indian entrepreneurs and manufacturers are resilient, and we are confident that business momentum will be consistently rising with planned strategies. What remains crucial is clarity on the tariff position against China,' even as he added, 'A more pressing concern is the undefined penalty clause linked to India's ties with Russia, which adds a layer of uncertainty.' The timing of this development is critical, as both countries have been actively engaged in negotiations for a mutually beneficial trade agreement. India's recent efforts to diversify trade relationships, including the signing of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the UK, many feel, signals a broader strategy to reduce dependence on any one market even as they added the US nonetheless remains one of India's largest trading partners, and any disruption in this relationship could have far-reaching implications for key export sectors such as textiles. 'The Free Trade Agreement with the UK opens up varied opportunities and is a welcoming move,' claimed an industry player interacting with Fibre2Fashion, who expressed apprehensions over the penalty ramifications if not sorted out soon. However, as things stand now, the Indian exporters seem to be adopting a cautious approach, a wait and watch policy to see how things unfold in the days to come as the steep duty imposed by US could hurt nearly half of India's exports, as per some estimates, adding to which is now the threat of additional penalty. Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DR)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
10 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Oil falls $2 a barrel on worries about Opec+ supply, US jobs data
Oil prices $2 a barrel on Friday because of jitters about a possible increase in production by Opec and its allies, while a weaker-than-expected US jobs report fed worries about demand. Brent crude futures settled at $69.67 a barrel, down $2.03, or 2.83 per cent. US West Texas Intermediate crude finished at $67.33 a barrel, down $1.93, or 2.79 per cent. Brent finished the week with a gain near 6 per cent, while WTI rose 6.29 per cent. Three people familiar with discussions among Opec members and allied producers said the group may reach an agreement as early as Sunday to boost production by 548,000 barrels per day in September. A fourth source familiar with Opec+ talks said discussions on volume were ongoing and the hike could be smaller. The US Labour Department said the country added 73,000 jobs in July, lower than economists had forecast, raising the national unemployment rate to 4.2 per cent from 4.1 per cent. "We can blame US President Donald Trump with the tariffs or we can blame the Federal Reserve for not raising interest rates," said Phil Flynn, senior analyst with Price Futures Group. "It looks like the Fed misjudged their decision on Wednesday." On Wednesday, the Fed voted to keep interest rates unchanged, drawing criticism from Trump and a chorus of Republican legislators. Oil traders have focused for much of the week on the potential impact of US tariffs, with tariff rates on US trading partners largely set to take effect from next Friday. Trump signed an executive order on Thursday imposing tariffs ranging from 10 per cent to 41 per cent on US imports from dozens of countries and foreign territories that failed to reach trade deals by his Aug. 1 deadline, including Canada, India and Taiwan. Partners that managed to secure trade agreements include the European Union, South Korea, Japan and Great Britain. "We think the resolution of trade deals to the satisfaction of the market - more or less, barring a few exceptions - has been the key driver for oil price bullishness in recent days," said Suvro Sarkar at DBS Bank. Prices were also supported this week by Trump's threats to impose 100 per cent secondary tariffs on Russian crude buyers as he seeks to pressure Russia into halting its war in Ukraine. This has stoked concern over potential disruption to oil trade flows and the removal of some oil from the market. On Thursday, JP Morgan analysts said Trump's threatened penalties on China and India over their purchases of Russian oil potentially put 2.75 million barrels per day (bpd) of Russian seaborne oil exports at risk. China and India are the world's second and third-largest crude consumers respectively. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
10 minutes ago
- Time of India
US Fed judge blocks Trump's plan to end protection from deportation of over 60,000 citizens of Nepal and other nations
San Francisco-based US District Judge Trina Thompson agreed the plaintiffs had shown there was sufficient racial animus behind the decision and that the Trump administration had failed to undertake an "objective review of the country conditions" before ending protections. A migrant is detained by federal immigration officers at U.S. immigration court in Manhattan, New York City, U.S. (File Photo) Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads A federal judge ruled against US President Donald Trump 's administration plans to end protections from deportation for citizens of Nepal Nicaragua and Honduras , barring their removal while the case continues, The Hill Francisco-based US District Judge Trina Thompson agreed the plaintiffs had shown there was sufficient racial animus behind the decision and that the Trump administration had failed to undertake an "objective review of the country conditions" before ending protections."The freedom to live fearlessly, the opportunity of liberty, and the American dream. That is all Plaintiffs seek. Instead, they are told to atone for their race, leave because of their names, and purify their blood," Thompson wrote. "The Court disagrees."The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Nepal in June and for Nicaragua and Honduras in July. Each country was initially designated after natural disasters, but the protections can also be offered to people unable to be deported to their home country due to civil moves would require 51,000 Hondurans and nearly 3,000 Nicaraguans who have been in the country for roughly 25 years to leave the county by September. Some 7,000 Nepalese citizens were also set to lose protections in just days, as per The reviewed a number of prior comments from Trump as well as Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem, including comments from the secretary referring to migrants as criminals and gang members, and the president stating that migrants were "poisoning the blood of our country.""Indeed, code words may demonstrate discriminatory intent," she wrote, The Hill quoted. "Color is neither a poison nor a crime."Thompson said the DHS failed to do the fulsome review required to end TPS, determining the Trump administration did not consider conditions beyond recovery from the hurricanes that rocked the Central American countries and the earthquake that sparked the designation for Nepal, as per The Hill.
