Latest news with #Hermandorfer
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
What can we expect from Trump's judicial nominees?
On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee held its first judicial nominations hearing of President Donald Trump's second term. They heard from Trump's first batch of potential federal judges since he returned to the White House: four nominees to Missouri federal district courts and a nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, the federal appeals court for Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. The 6th Circuit nominee, Whitney Hermandorfer, is impressively credentialed. Both the valedictorian of her law school class at George Washington University and the editor-in-chief of the law review, she worked at litigation powerhouse Williams & Connolly in Washington, D.C., where current partners sing her praises. Hermandorfer clerked for four federal judges, including three sitting Supreme Court justices. And after returning to her home state of Tennessee, she has served as the director of strategic litigation at the state attorney general's office. If I were invited to lunch with Hermandorfer, I expect she would be — as she was during Wednesday's hearing — modest, poised, interesting and likable. But her paper trail and some of her exchanges with senators could be ominous signs of the Trump judicial nominees to come. Put aside that Hermandorfer graduated from law school just 10 years ago and served as a law clerk for four of them. Her six years of actual legal practice is roughly half of what the American Bar Association considers necessary to be qualified for a federal judgeship. What's far more troubling is how she has spent that time and what she won't discuss. For example, Hermandorfer signed Tennessee's amicus brief in one of the birthright citizenship cases now before the Supreme Court. Tennessee's brief echoes the Trump administration's primary arguments: First, the citizenship clause does not confer citizenship simply because of a child's 'presence' in the U.S. And second, in any event, an injunction that extends beyond the plaintiffs in a given case and applies nationally is an unlawful exercise of judicial power. When Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asked Hermandorfer why Tennessee submitted that brief, she said: 'We were not satisfied that all of the information regarding the contemporaneous meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment was being presented to the various courts, given that the litigation was proceeding so quickly.' She elaborated that Tennessee's brief highlighted '1800s-era sources regarding the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment' and maintained that the state 'did not take an ultimate position with regard to the merits of the executive order,' but instead intended to underscore that it isn't an 'open-and-shut case.' That all sounds fair, right? Yet the brief's first page argues plainly that if the Constitution's citizenship clause is interpreted to focus on 'parental domicile,' or where someone's parents reside, rather than mere presence, Trump's executive order banning birthright citizenship is constitutional. That position is not only antithetical to more than 125 years of American jurisprudence and lived experience, but her response to Durbin also raises questions about her veracity. Hermandorfer's exchange with Sen. Amy Klobuchar about habeas corpus, the legal means by which a prisoner or detainee can seek release, was similarly revealing. The Minnesota Democrat noted White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller's recent statement that the Trump administration was 'actively looking at' suspending the writ of habeas corpus, which, according to the Constitution, can be suspended only 'when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.' Such suspensions are widely understood to require congressional action. As Hermandorfer's ex-boss Justice Barrett and appellate superstar Neal Katyal have jointly written, the relevant constitutional text 'does not specify which branch of government has the authority to suspend the privilege of the writ, but most agree that only Congress can do it.' Klobuchar therefore asked: 'Do you agree that only Congress can suspend the right to habeas corpus?' Hermandorfer wouldn't engage, however, much less acknowledge, that every time the writ has been suspended — even when the suspension ultimately was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court — Congress was either involved in the decision or ratified it thereafter, as as in Abraham Lincoln's case. Instead, she replied: That is a issue that is under active consideration by the political branches, and could very well come before me if I were confirmed as a judge. So I think, in prudence, as a judicial nominee, it would not be appropriate for me to pass on the validity of any such arguments. Hermandorfer isn't the first judicial nominee to somewhat mischaracterize her prior legal advocacy. Nor is she the first to avoid inconvenient questions. But until this administration, both birthright citizenship and the need for Congress to approve any suspension of habeas were taken as givens across the ideological spectrum. That Whitney Hermandorfer, like Trump himself, considers them viable legal disputes should concern us all. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump appellate court nominee defends experience at US Senate hearing
By Nate Raymond (Reuters) -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.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- General
- Hindustan Times
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.
USA Today
2 days ago
- General
- USA Today
Trump nominees for judgeships face scrutiny of youth, lack of experience
Trump nominees for judgeships face scrutiny of youth, lack of experience Show Caption Hide Caption What we know now about the Trump administration and justice system Could the Trump administrations actions against lawyers and judges set a precedent? Here is what we know now. President Donald Trump has started appointing judges to the federal bench, and they're facing scrutiny from Democrats and outside observers who question whether they are too young or unqualified to take their positions. Whitney Hermandorfer, Trump's nominee for a seat on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio, was the first to face the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 4. She's never been a judge, and said she has never tried a case to a jury verdict. "I am concerned about the striking brevity of your professional record," Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware, told Hermandorfer. He said she only graduated from law school 10 years, ago, but the judge she is being recommended to replace had 31 years on the bench before her nomination. Coons pointed to a longtime standard from the American Bar Association that says federal judicial appointees should have at least 12 years of experience. While the association has long been involved in vetting judicial appointments, Attorney General Pam Bondi has said the association, which many conservatives criticize as too liberal, won't be involved. Trump's nominees are being named at a time when his administration is seeking to broadly expand executive power through the use of executive orders and strategic firings. They have conservative records on issues such as abortion and transgender rights, and could broadly tip the judiciary more toward his agenda. Of the five lawyers who were scheduled to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee for their confirmation hearings Wednesday, only one, Cristian Stevens, is a sitting judge. Hermandorfer specializes in appeals for the Tennessee attorney general. Joshua Devine and Maria Lanahan work for the Missouri attorney general, and Zachary Bluestone works for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Missouri. The liberal group Alliance for Justice opposes the nomination of Divine, for example, to be U.S. District Court judge for the eastern and western districts of Missouri. He's currently the solicitor general of Missouri, who earned his law degree in 2016. He's challenged former President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness programs, and defended restrictions on abortion and transgender health. The group also opposes Bluestone, who finished his law degree in 2016. Mike Davis, whose conservative Article III Project backs Trump's judicial nominees, told Reuters that Trump "doesn't need to appease the D.C. establishment with weak and timid judges." "He is picking bold and fearless judges," Davis said. During the hearing, Coons asked how she would handle a hypothetical situation in which U.S. Marshalls refused to implement her court order. "That would, as a probably junior appellate judge, be something that I would look to my colleagues and whatever governing rules or precedents would govern that situation," she said. But Republicans widely praised Hermandorfer's resume, which shows she clerked for Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Thomas Alito in their current roles, and worked Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who now sits on the high court, when he was an appeals court judge. Cruz, a Republican from Texas, joked that he would filibuster Hermandorfer's out of jealousy that she clerked for three Supreme Court justices, and Sen. Ashley Moody, a Republican from Florida, said youth can bring tenacity to the bench and efficiency to moving cases along. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, signaled that the criticism about Hermandorfer's experience at the trial level wasn't relevant because she's up for an appeals court job. Instead, he asked her how many appellate cases she's handled. "I have litigated probably over 100 appellate cases," Hermandorfer answered. Contributing: Reuters
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
With judicial nomination of Whitney Hermandorfer, Trump commits to rule of law
President Trump notably won over many hesitant voters because of his commitment to taking judicial appointments seriously. His first judicial nomination of the new term is already making waves—and for all the right reasons. Whitney Hermandorfer, a brilliant lawyer and my former colleague, has been nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. For those who care about constitutional fidelity, separation of powers, and the integrity of the judiciary, this is more than a strong start—it's a signal. Hermandorfer is exactly the kind of judge we need more of: intellectually rigorous, temperamentally grounded, and deeply committed to the Constitution as written. She's not a headline-chaser or ideological crusader. She's a careful lawyer with a sterling record of public service and a deep understanding of the proper role of the judiciary. More: Trump announces Tennessee attorney as first judicial nomination of second term After clerking for then-Judge Leon on the D.C. District Court, for then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and then for Justices Sam Alito and Amy Coney Barrett at the Supreme Court, Hermandorfer spent several years in private practice at the prestigious law firm of Williams and Connolly before returning to public service in her home state of Tennessee. In an age when the courts are too often seen as super legislatures, her brand of humility and excellence is not only refreshing—it's essential. I had the privilege of working alongside Hermandorfer during her time at the Attorney General's Office in Tennessee. Whether tackling thorny constitutional questions, shepherding high-stakes litigation, or advising on complex legal policy, she brought the same qualities to bear: sharp analytical insight, humility, and an unyielding respect for the rule of law. She is not swayed by political expediency or cultural trends. She is, in the best sense, a lawyer's lawyer—and soon, she'll be a judge's judge. Hermandorfer's selection suggests that President Trump understands not only what is at stake, but how to meet the moment. The conservative legal movement is not about policy activism in robes. It is about restoring a proper understanding of the judiciary: to say what the law is, not what the law should be. This is not just theory. The judiciary's role in preserving our constitutional order has become more urgent in recent years. We've seen executive agencies issue sweeping mandates untethered from clear statutory authority. We've watched courts get pulled into partisan disputes better resolved through elections. And we've witnessed the erosion of the nondelegation doctrine, the encroachment of federal power into state prerogatives, and the slow drift away from textualist interpretation. Judges like Hermandorfer are an antidote to all of this. As a Tennessean, I'm proud to see someone from our region take on this important role. Hermandorfer will replace Judge Jane Branstetter Stranch who, although more ideologically to the left, still warrants praise for her commitment to public service and intellectual rigor. Hermandorfer will continue that legacy. She represents the best of the legal profession in the South: principled, capable, and constitutionally grounded. She will be fair, but firm. Thoughtful, but decisive. And above all, she will bring integrity to the bench. At a time when so much of our legal and political culture feels unstable, the judiciary must be a source of steadiness—not activism, not outrage, not partisanship. With this nomination, President Trump is off to a strong start. If Whitney Hermandorfer is any indication of what's to come, the future of the federal judiciary—and of the Constitution itself—looks a little brighter. Brandon Smith is a partner at Holtzman Vogel, based in Nashville, and a former Chief of Staff and Assistant Solicitor General in the Tennessee Attorney General's Office. He is also a former senior policy and legal advisor to Governors Sam Brownback and Matt Bevin. This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Trump's first judicial pick shows commitment to rule of law | Opinion
