On Friday, Democratic President Joe Biden celebrated a significant milestone in his presidency, marking his 235th appointment to the federal judiciary, which narrowly surpassed the record set by former President Donald Trump during his first term. The U.S. Senate confirmed two nominees to serve as federal trial court judges in California, concluding a concerted effort by the Biden administration to recalibrate the federal judiciary, which had veered towards a conservative ideology under Trump’s leadership. The breadth of Biden’s appointments reflects a historic commitment to diversity, as the percentage of women and individuals of color among Biden’s nominees far exceeds previous administrations. Amidst a landscape fraught with partisan divisions, Biden’s judicial appointments are deemed a crucial aspect of his broader agenda.
Biden’s achievement places him second in the annals of U.S. history for the number of judicial appointments made in a single term, trailing only former President Jimmy Carter, who appointed 262 judges during his term. The significance of Biden’s accomplishment has been underscored by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who lauded it as a noteworthy and historic record. Remarkably, Biden succeeded in appointing this number despite starting with fewer judicial vacancies than Trump, evidencing a strategic approach to filling open positions. However, while Biden’s total appointments exceeded Trump’s, he appointed fewer judges to appeals courts and made only one appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, compared to Trump’s three.
Biden’s focus on diversifying the federal judiciary was evident in his appointments, as approximately two-thirds of his appointees were women, and a similarly high percentage were from historically marginalized racial backgrounds. This commitment aligns with Biden’s campaign promise to build a federal judiciary reflective of the American populace. In a statement, Biden emphasized the importance of creating a judiciary that inspires public confidence, celebrating the appointment of judges whose backgrounds include significant experience in public defense and civil rights law. This shift represents a conscious effort to reshape a traditionally homogenous judicial landscape.
The latest confirmed appointees included Serena Murillo, a Los Angeles state court judge, who became the 150th woman confirmed to a judgeship under Biden. This achievement is significant as it establishes a new record for women judges appointed by a single president, surpassing the previous record held by Barack Obama, who appointed 138 women judges during his eight years in office. Additionally, the Senate also confirmed Benjamin Cheeks, a San Diego-based U.S. Magistrate Judge, elevating him to a lifetime position on the district court. Cheeks’ confirmation brings the total number of Black federal jurists appointed by Biden to 63, further highlighting the administration’s emphasis on diversity.
Biden’s focus, however, has not been without its critiques, particularly regarding appeals court appointments. His administration has nominated significantly fewer judges to the 13 appeals courts below the Supreme Court compared to Trump. Biden appointed 45 appellate judges, whereas Trump appointed 54, including 19 judges who filled seats previously held by Democrats. Given that appeals courts have the final say on a majority of cases in the judicial system, these comparative figures raise questions about the long-term ideological balance and influence of each presidency’s appointments.
As the Biden administration heads into its next phase, the legacy of these judicial appointments will continue to shape the federal bench’s composition for years to come. With Biden’s upcoming initiatives and the possible continuation of his judicial appointments, the potential remains for further diversification of the judiciary. Trump’s second term is also anticipated to grant him the opportunity to appoint many more judges, demonstrating the ongoing political battles that lie ahead in shaping the U.S. legal system. The contemporary judicial landscape will likely be impacted by these trends and appointments, as both parties navigate a complex interplay of power and influence within this critical aspect of governance.
