WASHINGTON: The Biden administration’s effort to appoint the first Muslim American federal appeals court judge is on the brink of collapse as another Democrat Senator has withdrawn support for the president’s nominee

Senator Jacky Rosen of Nevada state is the third Democratic senator to back out, and with the party having a slim 51-49 majority in the US Senate, the move effectively means Adeel Mangi cannot be appointed unless three Republican senators support him.

So far, no Republican has backed Mr Mangi’s nomination.

In November last year, President Joe Biden had nominated Mr Mangi, a Pakistani-American jurist, for the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals based in Philadelphia. It covers the states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the Virgin Islands.

The nomination was significant as circuit courts are the second of the three judiciary tiers under the US federal court system.

Under US law, judges of the Supreme and circuit courts are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

The opposition

The confirmation prospects for Mangi seemed uncertain from the start owing to the staunch Republican opposition. He faced intense scrutiny, particularly from conservatives unhappy with the appointment of a Muslim to a key judicial position.

The possibility of Mr Mangi’s appointment was dashed further last week when two Senate Democrats announced they would no longer support him.

Yet, Mr Biden’s supporters hoped that the Democratic leadership would be able to persuade them to reconsider their decision.

However, the third withdrawal of support has dashed their hopes.

Democrats seem more concerned about his alleged affiliation with a group they perceive as anti-law enforcement.

While announcing her decision in a statement on March 28, Senator Rosen said, “Given the concerns I’ve heard from law enforcement in Nevada, I am not planning to vote to confirm this nominee.”

Last week, Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada also cited Mr Mangi’s affiliation with the Alliance of Families for Justice, an organisation that advocates for criminal justice reform and provides support to families affected by mass incarceration and expressed concern over the group’s advocacy for individuals convicted of killing law enforcement officers.

Democratic Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, known for his bipartisan approach, has also opposed Mr Mangi’s nomination.

He stated that he would not support President Biden’s nominee unless he secures bipartisan backing.

Seventeen law enforcement groups, including the National Sheriffs’ Association and the National Association of Police Organizations, have also publicly opposed Mr Mangi’s nomination.

In a letter dated February 14, the head of the New Jersey State Policemen’s Benevolent Association described the Alliance of Families for Justice as advocating for “cop-killers to be freed from prison”.

Voices of support

White House Chief of Staff Jeffrey D. Zients has asserted that Mr Mangi has been subjected to Islamophobic smears by Republican lawmakers.

Despite opposition, The White House has stood by the president’s nominee.

Richard J. Durbin, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — which confirms the judges appointment — has also defended Mr Mangi and characterised criticisms against him as part of a “smear campaign.”

The lawmaker emphasised Mr Mangi’s “minimal involvement” with the Alliance of Families for Justice should not be misconstrued as support for individuals who have murdered law enforcement officers.

“As a longtime corporate lawyer, Mangi has never said or written anything — anything — that suggests he supports individuals who have murdered members of law enforcement,” Mr Durbin said in a floor speech earlier this month.

Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey also defended Mr Mangi, condemning the attacks on the nominee as unwarranted and indicative of bigotry.

“They have no basis in fact, and sadly, they smack of bigotry,” Mr Booker said. “They intend to exploit people’s fears. They intend to exploit people’s fears of his faith.”

Published in Dawn, March 31st, 2024

Opinion

Merging for what?

Merging for what?

The concern is that if the government is thinking of cutting costs through the merger, we might even lose the functionality levels we currently have.

Editorial

Dubai properties
Updated 16 May, 2024

Dubai properties

It is hoped that any investigation that is conducted will be fair and that no wrongdoing will be excused.
In good faith
16 May, 2024

In good faith

THE ‘P’ in PTI might as well stand for perplexing. After a constant yo-yoing around holding talks, the PTI has...
CTDs’ shortcomings
16 May, 2024

CTDs’ shortcomings

WHILE threats from terrorist groups need to be countered on the battlefield through military means, long-term ...
Reserved seats
Updated 15 May, 2024

Reserved seats

The ECP's decisions and actions clearly need to be reviewed in light of the country’s laws.
Secretive state
15 May, 2024

Secretive state

THERE is a fresh push by the state to stamp out all criticism by using the alibi of protecting national interests....
Plague of rape
15 May, 2024

Plague of rape

FLAWED narratives about women — from being weak and vulnerable to provocative and culpable — have led to...