I appreciate the perspective of Mike Fragoso, who knows more about judicial nominees than just about anyone else. Mike is clearly right that there is a risk of not letting Judge Southwick hand his sinecure to his law clerk. Southwick can simply not take senior status under President Trump. Indeed, if Butler's nomination is scuttled (Sullied?), Southwick can follow the unethical path of Judge Wynne and rescind his request for senior status. (Southwick's already fragile reputation would be irreparably tarnished by such a move.) If so, Southwick could either take senior status under a Democratic President, or just keep serving until his seat becomes otherwise vacant.
The argument goes that it is better to have even a questionable Republican-appointed judge on the Fifth Circuit, rather than a proven liberal like Carlton Reeves. I can certainly see the logic here. But I'm not sure it works.
For starters, we should remember that more than 90% of the Fifth Circuit cases are unanimous. For these cases, there is no meaningful difference between Edith Jones and Steve Higginson. For these cases, whether it is Southwick or Butler or Reeves, the outcome would be the same.
