Dennis Shedd

Dennis Shedd

Nonpartisan

Prior offices

United States District Court for the District of South Carolina

Predecessor: Karen Henderson

---

United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit

Predecessor: Clyde Hamilton

---

Education

Bachelor's

Wofford College, 1975

Graduate

Georgetown University Law Center, 1980

Law

University of South Carolina School of Law, 1978

Personal

Birthplace

Cordova, S.C.

float:right;
border:1px solid #FFB81F;
background-color: white;
width: 250px;
font-size: .9em;
margin-bottom:0px;

} .infobox p { margin-bottom: 0; } .widget-row { display: inline-block; width: 100%; margin-top: 1px; margin-bottom: 1px; } .widget-row.heading { font-size: 1.2em; } .widget-row.value-only { text-align: center; background-color: grey; color: white; font-weight: bold; } .widget-row.value-only.white { background-color: #f9f9f9; } .widget-row.value-only.black { background-color: #f9f9f9; color: black; } .widget-row.Democratic { background-color: #003388; color: white; font-weight: bold; } .widget-row.Republican { background-color: red; color: white; font-weight: bold; } .widget-row.Independent, .widget-row.Nonpartisan, .widget-row.Constitution { background-color: grey; color: white; font-weight: bold; } .widget-row.Libertarian { background-color: #f9d334; color: black; font-weight: bold; } .widget-row.Green { background-color: green; color: white; font-weight: bold; } .widget-key { width: 43%; display: inline-block; padding-left: 10px; vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold; } .widget-value { width: 57%; float: right; display: inline-block; padding-left: 10px; word-wrap: break-word; } .widget-img { width: 150px; display: block; margin: auto; } .clearfix { clear: both; }

Dennis W. Shedd was a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. He joined the court in 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush. He assumed senior status on January 30, 2018, and retired from the court on May 2, 2022.

Prior to joining the Fourth Circuit, he was a judge on the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina.

Education

Shedd graduated from Wofford College with his bachelor's degree in 1975, from the University of South Carolina Law Center with his J.D. in 1978, and from the Georgetown University Law Center with his LL.M. in 1980.

Professional career

• 2002 - 2022: Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
  • 2018 - 2022: Senior judge
  • 2002 - 2018: Judge
• 1990-2002: Judge, United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
• 1989-1992: Adjunct professor, University of South Carolina School of Law
  
• 1988-1991: Private practice, Columbia, S.C.
  
• 1978-1988: Staff, U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.)

• 1982-1984: Administrative assistant
• 1985-1886: Chief counsel and staff director, Senate Judiciary Committee

Judicial nominations and appointments

4th Circuit Court of Appeals

Nomination Tracker
Nominee Information
Name: Dennis W. Shedd
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
Progress
Confirmed 559 days after nomination.
ANominated: May 9, 2001
AABA Rating: Substantial Majority Well Qualified, Minority Qualified
Questionnaire:
AHearing: June 27, 2002
Hearing Transcript: Hearing Transcript
QFRs: (Hover over QFRs to read more)
AReported: November 14, 2002
AConfirmed: November 19, 2002
AVote: 55-44
AReturned: August 3, 2001

Shedd was first nominated to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit by President George W. Bush on May 9, 2001, to a seat vacated by Judge Clyde Hamilton who retired from judicial service. The American Bar Association rated Shedd Substantial Majority Well Qualified, Minority Qualified for the nomination. Under Rule XXXI, paragraph 6, of the standing rules of the U.S. Senate, Shedd's nomination was returned to President Bush on August 3, 2001. President Bush resubmitted Shedd's nomination on September 4, 2001. Hearings on Shedd's nomination were held before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary on June 27, 2002, and his nomination was reported by U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on November 14, 2002. Shedd was confirmed on a recorded Senate vote of 55-44 on November 19, 2002, and he received his commission on November 26, 2002.

United States District Court for the District of South Carolina

Shedd was nominated to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina by President George H.W. Bush on October 17, 1990, to a seat vacated by Judge Karen Henderson. The American Bar Association rated Shedd Substantial Majority Qualified, Minority Not Qualified for the nomination. Hearings on Shedd's nomination were held before the Senate Judiciary Committee on October 22, 1990, and his nomination was reported by then-U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) on October 24, 1990. Shedd was confirmed by the unanimous consent of the U.S. Senate on October 27, 1990, and he received his commission on October 30, 1990. Shedd resigned from the district court on December 10, 2002, upon his elevation to the Fourth Circuit. He was succeeded in this position by Judge Henry Floyd.

Noteworthy cases

Fourth Circuit strikes executive order limiting immigration/refugee admissions (2017)

See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit (Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project)

On May 25, 2017, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its ruling in a challenge to President Donald Trump's March 2017 executive order suspending immigration from six countries and reducing the number of refugee admissions into the U.S. for fiscal year 2017. Several plaintiffs challenged the order as an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment. A federal district judge sided with the plaintiffs and issued a nationwide injunction preventing enforcement of Section 2(c) of the order. In upholding Judge Chuang's decision, the Fourth Circuit majority held that a reasonable observer would likely conclude that EO-2's primary purpose was to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs.

Writing in dissent, Judge Dennis Shedd argued that the district court exceeded its authority to issue the injunction. Shedd wrote,

“

The shortcomings inherent in the district court’s fact-finding are obvious. It is primarily based on the district court’s selectively negative interpretation of political campaign statements made before the President swore his oath of office, its acceptance of the national security assessment of former government officials (many of whom openly oppose this President), its failure to account for the national security assessment of the current Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security, its misplaced conclusion regarding the President’s decision not to submit the Executive Order to the Executive bureaucracy for 'inter-agency review,' and the purported novelty of the temporary travel pause. Moreover, despite its express recognition of the dangers posed by the designated countries and the national security interests served by the temporary travel pause, the district court - with no access to intelligence information - criticized the President for failing to identify any instances of individuals who came from the designated countries having engaged in terrorist activity in the United States, faulted the President for not explaining why the temporary travel pause is the necessary response to the existing risks, and ultimately found that the President failed to prove that national security cannot be maintained without the temporary travel pause. As if all of this is not enough, the President’s supposed goal of 'banning Muslims' from the United States is not remotely served by the temporary travel pause, a fact that makes the district court’s factual finding even more dubious. The district court’s questionable fact-finding is sufficient (among other reasons) to vacate the injunction, but there is ultimately a more obvious fatal flaw in the injunction order: the court’s complete failure to actually account for the public interest. ... Today’s decision may be celebrated by some as a victory for individual civil rights and justice, and by others as a political defeat for this President. Yet, it is shortsighted to ignore the larger ramifications of this decision. Regrettably, at the end of the day, the real losers in this case are the millions of individual Americans whose security is threatened on a daily basis by those who seek to do us harm. Even if the district court’s instinct is correct and no tangible harm directly results from its order enjoining the President from attempting to protect American citizens, the injunction prohibits the government from addressing a serious risk identified by the Attorney General and Homeland Security Secretary; therefore, the security of our nation is indisputably lessened as a result of the injunction. Moreover, the President and his national security advisors (and perhaps future Presidents) will be seriously hampered in their ability to exercise their constitutional duty to protect this country.

”

On October 10, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a summary disposition in the case in which the court vacated the judgment of the Fourth Circuit and remanded the matter back to the lower court with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.

See also: Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project

See also

• United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
• United States District Court for the District of South Carolina

External links

• Judge Shedd's biography from the Federal Judicial Center
• Judge Shedd's biography from the Fourth Circuit's website

Footnotes

Political offices
Preceded by -	United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit 2018-2022	Succeeded by -
Preceded by Clyde Hamilton	United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit 2002-2018	Succeeded by -
Preceded by Karen Henderson	United States District Court for the District of South Carolina 1990-2002	Succeeded by -