At 37 years old, T. Elliot Gaiser, a former clerk for Justice Samuel Alito, holds a job most lawyers can only dream of. He heads the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which provides legal advice to the White House and executive agencies.
But Gaiser, like several others, could become a federal judge by year’s end, thanks to a full-court press by the White House and Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley to confirm as many “constitutionalist judges” as possible before Republicans lose their majority come January.
On Thursday, the Senate confirmed its first judge since the Nov. 3 election, putting Gregory Cook in an Alabama district court seat. A confirmation vote is also scheduled for Monday on federal appeals court nominee Daniel Domenico. The Senate also took an initial vote Thursday on appeals court nominee Anna St. John. By the end of the week, the Senate could hold initial votes on as many as four more judicial nominations, each of which was advanced by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.
The agenda for a committee meeting next week contemplates a vote on five other judicial nominees. According to a Democratic staffer for the committee, Grassley tentatively has scheduled eight judicial nominees for a Nov. 18 nominations hearing, despite the fact that some had not yet been formally nominated by President Donald Trump when the committee was notified.
Gaiser is among them. As reflected in Senate Judiciary Committee documents obtained by MS NOW, Gaiser was not contacted by anyone about a potential judicial nomination until Nov. 4 — the day after Democrats’ historic wins in the midterm elections — when staff from Sen. Ted Cruz’s office contacted him to discuss the vacancy.
“When you move quickly, there is always a chance you make a mistake, but the alternative is that you lose the seat.”
Mike Davis, Trump legal adviser
Within two days, Gaiser also spoke with staff for outgoing Sen. John Cornyn of Texas and “was informed by the White House Counsel’s Office that I was under consideration for nomination.” The next day, he signed his SJQ — the questionnaire nominees for Justice Department posts and federal judgeships complete before their nomination hearings — and it was distributed to senators the day after.
The White House formally transmitted Gaiser’s nomination on Tuesday, but there was no record of it on congressional or White House websites as of Thursday afternoon.
That is not the only oddity concerning his nomination. According to a Democratic staffer for the committee, Gaiser, an Ohio native, lived in Houston briefly during a judicial clerkship but has never lived in the Northern District or anywhere else in Texas. (At present, there are no vacancies on the federal appeals court for Ohio, the Sixth Circuit, nor on any of the Ohio federal district courts.)
As to why Gaiser would be nominated to a lifetime judicial post in a district where he has not lived, a federal source familiar with Gaiser’s nomination, who was granted anonymity to discuss the situation, told MS NOW that Gaiser has extended family in the Dallas area and that he and his family have long wanted to live closer to them.
Mike Davis, a longtime Trump legal adviser, dismissed concerns about the vetting process having been rushed, saying many of the nominees have “been in the works” for a while and were already vetted.
“When you move quickly, there is always a chance you make a mistake, but the alternative is that you lose the seat,” Davis told MS NOW.
Gaiser is respected and well-liked by former colleagues. Former Trump Justice Department Civil Rights chief Harmeet Dhillon told MS NOW, “Elliott Gaiser was one of my favorite colleagues at DOJ — brilliant, principled, unfailingly pleasant to work with, responsive, and also a man with a lovely family. I am absolutely thrilled for our country and for the Gaisers at this nomination. He will be the kind of fair, smart, and attentive judge every federal practitioner hopes to draw for their case. I wish him a swift confirmation.”
Gaiser was not vetted by the judicial evaluation committee established by Cruz and Cornyn, the latter of whom has expressed reservations that Gaiser did not undergo that screening process. In a report published Wednesday, Cornyn told The Associated Press, “Trying to air-drop somebody else in at the last minute for the Dallas vacancy that hasn’t been through that process, I think is a concern.”
Texas Supreme Court Judge James Sullivan’s nomination to the Western District of Texas has been handled similarly.
His questionnaire, also reviewed by MS NOW, indicated that he was interviewed by Cruz and Cornyn’s committee roughly 18 months ago. Yet he was not interviewed by the White House Counsel’s Office until less than a month ago. Sullivan also signed his questionnaire on Oct. 30, while he was seeking election to the Texas Supreme Court. It was distributed to the Senate committee on Nov. 4, the day after he lost. Sullivan, according to the Democratic staffer for the Senate Judiciary Committee, is also expected to testify at next week’s hearing.
John Bash, who served as the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas during Trump’s first term, told MS NOW, “I’ve known Justice Sullivan for more than 20 years, since we served together on the Harvard Law Review. He is equal parts brilliant and genuine, and I expect he will bring thoughtfulness and independence to the federal bench.”
As with Gaiser, Sullivan’s nomination was formally transmitted on Tuesday, but public websites did not contain any record of it as of Thursday afternoon.
A third nominee, Daniel Ballou, who is seeking a district court judgeship in Kentucky’s Eastern District, was first nominated by the White House in September and questioned by senators that month. He now faces questions about his fitness for the job after Kentucky’s Judicial Conduct Commission opened formal charges against him last month.
Ballou, who is currently the chief circuit judge for two Kentucky counties, has been accused of violating multiple Kentucky rules for judges by disciplining a female lawyer who filmed a video in his courtroom before proceedings began. In its notice to Ballou, the Judicial Conduct Commission alleged that, without providing the lawyer with prior notice or an opportunity to be heard, Ballou prohibited her from using any electronic devices in the courthouse, even as other lawyers in his courtroom displayed and used their own phones. It further alleged that Ballou’s conduct violates several state rules on judicial conduct, including those requiring judges to perform their duties fairly and impartially, to treat all litigants and lawyers with dignity and courtesy, and to refrain from exhibiting bias or prejudice. In answering the charges earlier this week, Ballou offered multiple factual and legal defenses to the commission’s allegations.
In 2011, Ballou was reprimanded by the same body for publicly endorsing now-Sen. Rand Paul in a 2010 email. In response to written questions from Democratic senators, Ballou acknowledged, “I was wrong,” noting he has learned “since the 2010 race to keep my opinions to myself and to vote in silence.”
The Department of Justice deferred questions about judicial nominees to the White House.
The White House did not immediately respond to MS NOW’s request for comment.
In the days before the midterm elections, one outside Trump adviser told MS NOW that he hoped Republicans could at least keep 50 seats in the Senate “so we could still get judges through.” But with Democrats netting at least 55 seats, those hopes have been dashed, and Trump allies are now rushing to fill as many vacancies as they can.
A rush to confirm federal judges during a lame-duck session is not novel. Public records show that in 2024, the Senate confirmed 22 Biden nominees to federal district and appeals courts after the November election and before the end of the year.
But the Democratic staffer for the committee noted that the speed with which Trump and Grassley are moving to process and confirm nominees is not only atypical, but a breach of committee protocol. Under usual committee norms, questionnaires must be received at least 28 days before a hearing to give senators and their staff can review nominees’ credentials and legal careers. Sullivan’s questionnaire was submitted 14 days before his expected hearing; Gaiser’s was presented only 10 days ahead of his scheduled hearing.
In his first term, Trump was able to install nearly 250 federal judges and three Supreme Court justices — a record that became an enormous point of pride for him and an accomplishment conservatives could point to when pressed on his many controversies. That record was made possible in part with help from longtime conservative activist Leonard Leo and then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Trump is now estranged from both men, which some of his allies believe has hampered his ability to select the highest-caliber judges and confirm them swiftly.
Federal records reflect that there are currently 27 district court vacancies with 10 pending nominees. Trump has also nominated 10 other individuals to fill future vacancies: six on district courts and four on appellate courts.
Davis says the appellate courts are the administration’s priority, but they think that even when Democrats take over, Trump has already made his mark on the courts. “President Trump appointed so many judges that he transformed the courts in his first term, so now there aren’t actually a lot of vacancies to fill.”
And he may in fact have to be satisfied with what he has accomplished so far, as Trump also faces a new obstacle: pushback from Republican senators, including Sen. Thom Tillis, who announced in June 2025 that he would not seek re-election amid a series of public clashes with Trump, and Cornyn, who lost his party’s primary to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who was endorsed by Trump.
On Tuesday, Trump withdrew his nomination of federal district judge Lee Rudofsky to the Eighth Circuit. According to The Associated Press, Cornyn and Tillis had privately indicated to Grassley that they would oppose Rudofsky’s nomination. Trump immediately nominated an alternative: Arkansas Supreme Court Justice Cody Hiland, who was the preferred candidate of his state’s senators, John Boozman and Tom Cotton. In August, Hiland told an audience of law students that, after undergoing interviews and vetting by the Trump administration for an Eighth Circuit vacancy, he had been offered a district court nomination, which he declined.
The AP also reported that Grassley was forced to postpone a committee vote Tuesday on Oklahoma district court nominee Zachary West because of concerns from one of his home-state senators, Alan Armstrong, who had the backing of Tillis.
Davis urged reluctant Republicans to get on board. “Would [Cornyn] rather give that seat to Democrats? You can have a very good nominee now, who may not be your top choice, or the Democrats are going to take the seats. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the very good. It’s time to put bruised egos aside and get judges confirmed.”
Jack Fitzpatrick contributed reporting.
The post Trump rushes to fill judicial seats before Democrats take over appeared first on MS NOW.
Author: Source Author
From MS Now.
Leave a Reply