Graham lobbies White House on Childs for Supreme Court seat

[mystery-ak]

Graham lobbies White House on Childs for Supreme Court seat
By Jordain Carney - 02/02/22 02:08 PM EST



Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Wednesday that he pitched district court Judge J. Michelle Childs to the White House counsel's office this week and warned that voting to support another pick would be "much more problematic" for him.

"I told them what I've been saying publicly that Michelle Childs is well known in South Carolina, there's a lot of support among Republicans, Democrats who practice law in South Carolina. I've known her and I think she's a quality person, somebody I could see myself supporting," Graham told reporters, recounting the conversation that took place on Tuesday night.

"I was just telling them I think she's a good candidate. She would get a lot of bipartisan support if she did well at the hearing," Graham added.

Graham has been publicly talking up Childs, who the White House has confirmed is under consideration to succeed retiring Justice Stephen Breyer, and she came up as part of a conversation Graham had with Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) on Wednesday.

more
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/592506-graham-lobbies-white-house-on-childs-for-supreme-court-seat

[Free Vulcan]

I looked for information on her record of rulings, it was fairly sparse.

There was one article from a leftist site that thought she was too hard on criminals. From their perspective anyway. I didn't find the arguments particularly persuasive.

Not much beyond that in terms of a wider array of case topics.

Just hoping for someone in the ballpark of Breyer as a replacement, as that's about the best we can hope for. Maybe Graham is supporting her because she's the best of the worst.

[Kamaji]

Going from District Court to Supreme Court, without a distinguished record of written opinions, is quite a leap - for anyone other than an affirmative action baby.

[Kamaji]

Well, according to this article:  https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/potential-supreme-court-nominee-michelle-childs/story?id=82585567

She had a hand in making the 2020 elections less reliable:

Childs struck down a law requiring voters to sign absentee-ballot envelopes in the presence of a witness for the November 2020 election, citing the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. She reasoned that the challengers were "substantially likely" to be able to show that the combination of the witness requirement and the "unique risks posed by the COVID-19 pandemic" infringe on the challengers' constitutional right to vote.

Childs directed the state to "immediately and publicly inform" voters that the witness requirement is not in effect, including on websites and through social media. On appeal to the full Fourth Circuit, a majority of the court upheld Childs' decision. However, the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately overturned Judge Childs' ruling but made an exception for ballots cast before it acted and received within two days.

[Kamaji]

Left-winger's "fact sheet" on Judge Childs:  https://www.afj.org/document/j-michelle-childs-fact-sheet/

[Right_in_Virginia]

A sampling ......

Cases

In November 2014, Childs ruled in favor of two women who sued to have the state recognize their marriage performed in Washington, D.C., finding South Carolina's failure to recognize their marriage to be unconstitutional.

In September 2020, Childs granted a preliminary injunction that blocked South Carolina's absentee ballot witness requirement. A United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit panel initially blocked the injunction granted by Childs, but the full appeals court reinstated it during an en banc session. Ultimately, the injunction was struck down by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Childs has made two decisions related to nuclear reactor facilities in South Carolina. First, in August 2018, Childs refused to enjoin a state law that forced a state utility to cut its customers’ rates after the failed construction of two new nuclear reactors in Fairfield County.

Second, in December 2021, Childs rejected a request to enjoin a vaccine mandate from workers at a South Carolina nuclear facility.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michelle_Childs

[Bigun]

Going from District Court to Supreme Court, without a distinguished record of written opinions, is quite a leap - for anyone other than an affirmative action baby.

I'm not so sure about that. Our record with those who do have long resumes ain't all that good either IMHO.

[Hoodat]

Going from District Court to Supreme Court, without a distinguished record of written opinions, is quite a leap - for anyone other than an affirmative action baby.

She is currently nominated for the DC Court of Appeals and is awaiting Senate confirmation.  That puts her ahead of Ruth Bader Ginsburg who never earned an appellate court nomination.  And then there's Elena Kagan who never spent one day in a judge's seat before being confirmed for the US Supreme Court.

[Kamaji]

She is currently nominated for the DC Court of Appeals and is awaiting Senate confirmation.  That puts her ahead of Ruth Bader Ginsburg who never earned an appellate court nomination.  And then there's Elena Kagan who never spent one day in a judge's seat before being confirmed for the US Supreme Court.

Fair enough.  I retract my characterization.  I was not aware that she was being considered for a Circuit Court position.