Welcome to the Jan. 13 edition of Robe & Gavel, Ballotpedia’s newsletter about the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) and other judicial happenings around the U.S.
Ring out, wild bells, to the wild sky,
The flying cloud, the frosty light;
The year is dying in the night;
Ring out, wild bells, and let him die.
Ring out the old, ring in the new,
Ring, happy bells, across the snow:
The year is going, let him go;
Ring out the false, ring in the true.
-Alfred, Lord Tennyson
We’re back with the first Robe & Gavel edition of 2025! How we missed you, dear reader. But fret not. We have some exciting federal courts updates for you. So grab a seat and let’s gavel in!
Follow Ballotpedia on X or subscribe to the Daily Brew for the latest news and analysis.
We #SCOTUS and you can, too!
Grants
SCOTUS has accepted seven new cases to its merits docket since our Dec. 9 issue. To date, the court has agreed to hear 56 cases for the 2024-2025 term. Two cases were dismissed.
Click the links below to learn more about these cases:
- Diamond Alternative Energy LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and concerns the redressability component of Article III standing.
- Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission concerns the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The case originated from the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
- Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (formerly Kerr v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic) originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and concerns the Medicaid Act’s any-qualified-provider provision.
- TikTok, Inc. v. Garland (Consolidated with Firebaugh v. Garland) concerns the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The following cases were accepted on Jan. 10
- Becerra v. Braidwood Management
- Department of Education v. Career Colleges and Schools of Texas
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Zuch
Arguments
On Jan. 10, SCOTUS heard TikTok, Inc. v. Garland (Consolidated with Firebaugh v. Garland) which concerns the First Amendment.
- The questions presented: “Whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as applied to petitioners, violates the First Amendment.”
The Supreme Court will hear five arguments this week. Click here to read more about SCOTUS’ current term.
Click the links below to learn more about these cases:
Jan. 13
- Hewitt v. United States (Consolidated with Duffey v. United States) concerns whether the First Step Act retroactively applies to a person charged before the law was passed.
- The questions presented: “Whether the First Step Act’s sentencing reduction provisions apply to a defendant originally sentenced before the First Step Act’s enactment when that original sentence is judicially vacated and the defendant is resentenced to a new term of imprisonment after the First Step Act’s enactment.”
- Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida concerns qualifying for retirement benefits under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
- The questions presented: “Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, does a former employee—who was qualified to perform her job and who earned post-employment benefits while employed—lose her right to sue over discrimination with respect to those benefits solely because she no longer holds her job?”
Jan. 14
- Thompson v. United States concerns whether making a false statement, as defined in 18 U.S.C § 1014, includes statements that are misleading, but not necessarily false.
- The questions presented: “Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which prohibits making a ‘false statement’ for the purpose of influencing certain financial institutions and federal agencies, also prohibits making a statement that is misleading but not false.”
- Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services concerns whether a voluntary dismissal, as outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a), qualifies as a “final judgment, order, or proceeding,” as described in Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b).
- The questions presented: “Whether a Rule 41 voluntary dismissal without prejudice is a ‘final judgment, order, or proceeding’ under Rule 60 (b).”
Jan. 15
- Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton concerns people’s access to protected speech.
- The questions presented: “Whether the court of appeals erred as a matter of law in applying rational-basis review to a law burdening adults’ access to protected speech, instead of strict scrutiny as this Court and other circuits have consistently done.”
On Jan. 10, SCOTUS heard TikTok, Inc. v. Garland (Consolidated with Firebaugh v. Garland) which concerns the First Amendment.
- The questions presented: “Whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as applied to petitioners, violates the First Amendment.”
In its October 2023-2024 term, SCOTUS heard arguments in 62 cases. Click here to read more about SCOTUS’ previous term.
Opinions
SCOTUS has ruled two cases since our Dec. 9 edition. The court has issued rulings in four cases so far this term. Click the links below to learn more about these cases:
The Federal Vacancy Count
The Federal Vacancy Count tracks vacancies, nominations, and confirmations to all United States Article III federal courts in a one-month period. This month’s edition includes nominations, confirmations, and vacancies from Dec. 2, through Jan. 1 and compares Article III judicial appointments over time by president and by court type through Dec. 31 of their fourth year in office.
Highlights
- Vacancies: There have been three new judicial vacancies since the December 2024 report. There are 39 vacancies out of 870 active Article III judicial positions on courts covered in this report. Including the United States Court of Federal Claims and the United States territorial courts, 39 of 890 active federal judicial positions are vacant.
- Nominations: There were no new nominations since the December 2024 report.
- Confirmations: There were 14 new confirmations since the December 2024 report.
Vacancy count for Jan. 1, 2025
A breakdown of the vacancies at each level can be found in the table below. For a more detailed look at the vacancies in the federal courts, click here.
*Though the United States territorial courts are named as district courts, they are not Article III courts. They are created in accordance with the power granted under Article IV of the U.S. Constitution. Click here for more information.
New vacancies
Four judges left active status since the previous vacancy count, creating Article III life-term judicial vacancies. The president nominates individuals to fill Article III judicial position vacancies. Nominations are subject to U.S. Senate confirmation.
- Judge Loretta Copeland Biggs assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.
- Judge Catherine Eagles assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.
- Judge Lorna Schofield assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- Judge William E. Smith assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island.
The following chart tracks the number of vacancies in the U.S. Courts of Appeals from President Joe Biden’s (D) inauguration to the date indicated on the chart.
U.S. District Court vacancies
The following map shows the number of vacancies in the U.S. District Courts as of Jan.1.
New nominations
President Biden announced no new nominations since the December 2024 report.
New confirmations
As of Jan. 1, the Senate has confirmed 235 of President Biden’s Article III judicial nominees—187 district court judges, 45 appeals court judges, two international trade judges, and one Supreme Court justice—since January 2021.
- Anne Hwang, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- Brian Murphy, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
- Sparkle Sooknanan, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- Gail Weilheimer, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
- Catherine Henry, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
- Elizabeth Coombe, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
- Anthony Brindisi, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
- Sarah Davenport, to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico
- Tiffany Johnson, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
- Keli Neary, to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
- Cynthia Valenzuela, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- Noël Wise, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- Benjamin Cheeks, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
- Serena R. Murillo, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Comparison of Article III judicial appointments over time by president (1981-Present)
- Presidents have made an average of 201 judicial appointments through Dec. 31 of their fourth year in office.
- President Donald Trump (R) made the most appointments through four years with 234. President Ronald Reagan (R) made the fewest through four years with 166.
- President Trump (R) made the most appointments through three years with 187. President Reagan (R) made the fewest with 122.
- President Bill Clinton (D) made the most appointments through two years with 128. President Barack Obama (D) made the fewest with 62.
- President Reagan (R) made the most appointments through one year in office with 41. President Obama (D) made the fewest with 13.
Need a daily fix of judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? Click here for continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.
Or, keep an eye on this list for updates on federal judicial nominations.
Federal courts recent news
- Supreme Court allows Trump’s New York criminal sentencing to go forward
- Chief Justice John Roberts releases year-end report
Looking ahead
We’ll be back on Jan. 20 with a new edition of Robe & Gavel. Until then, gaveling out!
Contributions
Myj Saintyl compiled and edited this newsletter, with contributions from Sam Post and Ellie Mikus.