The Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary’s policymaking body, quietly voted to advise the president and Senate to refrain from filling the next vacancies on the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—an appeal to trimming bench size driven by persistently low caseloads per judge (Reuters). This recommendation, first made in 2017 and reaffirmed in March, extends to upcoming openings in West Virginia, Michigan and Wyoming, reflecting a data-driven push to steward public resources more prudently (Reuters).
Yet history suggests these entreaties will go unheeded. Both Donald Trump in his first term and President Biden thereafter have routinely overlooked the Conference’s “do-nothing” pleas, opting instead to cement their judicial legacies with fresh appointments (Reuters). With two long-serving Republican appointees on the 10th Circuit nearing senior status—Judges Harris Hartz and Timothy Tymkovich—the stage is set for another round of nominations that could reshape the court’s ideological balance.
Brookings Institution fellow Russell Wheeler quips that the Conference likely anticipates such disregard, yet persists in issuing its biennial vacancy lists “partly to present itself as a careful steward of public funds.” Whatever the outcome, the 10th Circuit—which hears appeals from six Western states—remains emblematic of a judiciary caught between prudent resource management and the political imperative to influence the federal bench.
