Judicial vacancies during the Biden administration
President Joe Biden (D) inherited 46 Article III lifetime federal judicial vacancies requiring a presidential nomination when he was inaugurated on January 20, 2021. Across 890 federal judicial positions, there was an average of 70 vacancies a month from January 2021 to November 1, 2024.[1]
This page provides an overview of recent vacancies, nominations, and confirmations; the number of vacancies by month; the number of nominations and confirmations by month; historical analysis of the state of the federal judiciary at the start of Biden's term compared to that of his six immediate predecessors; and an analysis of possible judicial openings during Biden's term of office.
For monthly updates on vacancies and appointments in the federal judiciary, see the federal judicial vacancy count. For a list of individuals nominated to fill these vacancies, click here.
The Federal Judicial Vacancy Count
| Key: | |
| (Numbers indicate % of seats vacant.) | |
| 0% | 1%-9% |
| 10%-24% | 25%-40% |
| More than 40% | |
The vacancy level was 
in October 2024. The total vacancy percentage was 5.3 percent, and there were 46 vacancies out of 870 Article III judicial positions.
A breakdown of the vacancies at each level can be found in the table below. For a more detailed look at the vacancies on the federal courts, click here.
| Key: | |
| (Numbers indicate % of seats vacant.) | |
| 0% | 1%-9% |
| 10%-24% | 25%-40% |
| More than 40% | |
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
Three judges left active status, creating Article III life-term judicial vacancies. As Article III judicial positions, these vacancies must be filled by a nomination from the president. Nominations are subject to confirmation on the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate.
- Judge Philip Gutierrez assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
- Judge Murray Snow assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
- Judge William Kayatta assumed senior status on the U.S. District Court for the First Circuit.
New nominations
President Joe Biden (D) announced two new nominations since the previous report.
- Serena R. Murillo, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
- Benjamin Cheeks, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
Since taking office in January 2021, Biden has nominated 253 individuals to Article III positions.
New confirmations
There have been no new confirmations since the previous report:
As of November 1, 2024, the Senate has confirmed 213 of President Biden's Article III judicial nominees—166 district court judges, 44 appeals court judges, two international trade judges, and one Supreme Court justice—since his inauguration on January 20, 2021. To review a complete list of Biden's confirmed nominees, click here.
Map of federal district court vacancies
Vacancies by month
The following chart shows the total number of judicial vacancies at the start of each month under the Biden administration beginning in January 2021. This number comes from vacancies in the U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. District Courts, U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and the U.S. Supreme Court.[1] This chart is updated at the start of each month with new vacancy data.
Nominations and confirmations by month
At the start of each month, Ballotpedia charts the number of new nominations, confirmations, and ongoing nominations during the Biden administration. These numbers come from nominations and confirmations in the U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. District Courts, U.S. Court of International Trade, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The ongoing nominations figures are calculated using the number of nominees awaiting action in the U.S. Senate. This chart is updated at the start of each month with new nominations and confirmations data.
Historical context
Scope
The scope of the historical analysis presented below is limited to those judicial positions on Article III courts in which confirmed nominees serve a life term. As of 2021, there were 870 of those positions. They include positions on the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. courts of appeal, and U.S. district courts. Regarding the district courts, we did not include four federal district judges who serve on U.S. territorial courts, as these district judges serve fixed terms of service.
By definition, a federal judge is a judge serving on any federal court. There is, however, considerable variation in the term length for these federal judges. Some federal judges are appointed for a life term, consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution, but there are other judges on Article III courts who serve a fixed term of office. Some judges serve on courts created under Article I of the Constitution. Some are local judges in Washington, D.C., who are still subject to presidential nomination and confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
Vacancies
Vacancies at the start of term
On January 20, 2021, President Joe Biden (D) inherited 46 Article III federal judicial vacancies. As of his inauguration, there were two vacancies in the U.S. courts of appeal, 43 vacancies in the U.S. district courts, and one vacancy on the U.S. Court of International Trade.
So how did Biden compare with his predecessors on inherited vacancies? Biden had the third-lowest number of vacancies to fill since 1980. The two presidents with fewer seats to fill were President Ronald Reagan (R) with 34 and President George H.W. Bush (R) with 37. Biden's 46 inherited vacancies represent roughly one in every 20 life-term judicial positions (5.29%).
On December 1, 1990, the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 was signed into law by President George H.W. Bush. The act created 85 new federal judicial positions, but faced with an opposition Congress, the first Iraq War in 1991, and a failed re-election bid in 1992, President Bush never got to fill many of these new appointments.[2][3]
The charts below show the vacancy data by both circuit courts and district courts. The data show Biden had the lowest percentage of circuit court vacancies and the fourth-highest percentage of district court vacancies among recent incoming administrations.
Vacancies throughout a term
Vacancies occur for a number of reasons. Some judges choose to retire from judicial service entirely without taking senior status, and some judges resign prior to retirement. Others are elevated to a different federal judicial position, which creates a vacancy in the court on which that judge served previously. Some judicial vacancies are created when new positions are designated by statute. Some judges have been impeached and removed from judicial service. Sometimes judges die during the course of their active judicial service.
The most common reason a vacancy is created is when a judge elects to take senior status. When a judge takes senior status—which is a strictly voluntary decision, as a judge cannot be compelled to do so—this creates a vacancy that is filled via a presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. Under the Rule of 80, which is governed by provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 371, beginning at age 65, a judge may retire at his or her current salary or take senior status after performing 15 years of active service as an Article III federal judge.[4] As a judge's age increases until 70 years old, the number of years of service decreases, so long as the age and years of service added together equals 80.[5]
Federal judges are eligible for senior status at the following combined ages and years of service:[4]
Total appointments by presidentThe following chart shows the total judgeship appointments made by each president from 1901 to 2021. Blue slips and the nomination processA blue slip is the name for a piece of paper a home-state senator returns to the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee to show his or her approval of a federal judicial nominee. The United States Constitution does not mandate the use of blue slips, but they are considered a senatorial courtesy. Although United States senators have the power to prevent a federal judicial nominee from receiving a hearing and subsequently being confirmed, they are not required to state a reason.[6]
117th CongressSen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) became chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee in February 2021.[7] On March 1, 2021, in an interview with The New York Times, Durbin said that he would follow the precedent established by his predecessors—Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) who served as the committee chair in the 116th Congress and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) who served as chair during the 115th Congress—in following the blue slip tradition for district court nominees but not for circuit court nominees. Durbin said that he might reconsider following the blue slip tradition with district court nominees.[8][9][10][11] Nominations with withheld blue slipsThe following summaries are taken from each judicial nominee's profile page. For more, click the link to each candidate's profile. Nomination of Andre Mathis to the 6th Circuit
On Nov. 18, 2021, President Joe Biden (D) nominated Andre Mathis to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. He was confirmed by a 48-47 vote of the U.S. Senate on Sept. 8, 2022.[12][13] Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said of Mathis: "It has been made public that he has a rap sheet with a laundry list of citations, including multiple failures to appear in court in Tennessee. We expect our judges to respect the law, not disregard it. If Mr. Mathis thought he was above the law before, imagine how he'll conduct himself if he's confirmed."[14] Former NAACP President Cornell William Brooks responded to Blackburn's comments in an interview with CNN. He said, "Here we have the first woman elected to the United States Senate from the state of Tennessee humiliating, denigrating, demeaning a Black man. She refers to less than a handful of speeding tickets as a 'rap sheet.'"[14] Nomination of William Pocan to the Eastern District of Wisconsin
On Dec. 15, 2021, President Joe Biden (D) nominated Pocan to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.[15] Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who had initially recommended Pocan to Biden, announced in February 2022 that he would withhold his blue slip, saying that he had "been hearing concerns from the Green Bay legal community that they needed a judge who is locally based and actively involved in their community," and that he "cannot support someone for a lifetime appointment that has granted low bail for someone charged with violent felonies."[16] Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Pocan's brother, defended the nomination, saying that Pocan "has a stellar reputation among Democratic and Republican lawyers and other judges," and that there was no reason to deny Pocan "other than my brother happens to be married to a man."[17] Nomination of Arianna Freeman to the 3rd Circuit
On Jan. 19, 2022, President Joe Biden (D) nominated Arianna Freeman to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.[18] Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) withheld his blue slip, with a spokesperson stating that Toomey "felt that while she has some credentials in a very niche area of the law, she lacks the breadth of experience needed to serve as a federal appellate judge" in reference to her background as a public defender.[19] Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, defended Freeman's experience. He said, "It takes a special kind of person to dedicate themselves to those who have perhaps committed awful crimes, dedicate themselves to the ideal to everyone — even the poor, even the abused, even the addicted, even those who have done wretched things — deserve representation."[20] See alsoFootnotes
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
