Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, a federal district court judge based in Florida, ruled on Monday that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) lacks the authority to extend the federal mask mandate for public transportation.
Mizelle found that the CDC violated the Administrative Procedures Act when it implemented the mandate without the submitting to the required public comment period. She also held that the mandate lacked specificity, as it "did not differentiate between kinds of masks based on their efficacy at blocking transmission." On top of that, the CDC did not derive the mandate from a specific line of the Public Health Services Act. The agency’s claim that the mandate was covered under the law’s “sanitation” clause doesn’t hold up, Mizelle argued.
But much of the criticism of the decision has concentrated not on those merits, but on its issuer. Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, for example, asked “who should decide whether air passengers must wear masks: A federal agency staffed with experts accountable to the president, who is accountable to the people? Or a 35-year-old Trump judge in Tampa” whose only qualification was her “clerkships with conservative judges.”
So, who is this “35-year-old Trump judge”?
Mizelle was nominated to the district court for the Middle District of Florida by former president Trump in September 2020 at age 33, and confirmed in a 49-to-41 Senate vote later that year.
On her qualifications, Stern both overstates the extent to which Mizelle’s career has been defined by her clerkships, and understates the gravity of her time spent serving under federal judges. Since graduating from the University of Florida’s Levin College of Law, where she now serves an adjunct professor, she has clerked for one district court judge and two circuit court judges before eventually clerking at the Supreme Court under Clarence Thomas — providing her with hands-on experience at all three levels of the federal court system.
She’s also worked in private practice, served as counsel in the Office of the Associate Attorney General, and been both a trial attorney in the Department of Justice’s tax division and Special Assistant United States Attorney.
At her confirmation hearing, Mizelle shed some light on her personal life, professing “to owe a lifetime of gratitude to my parents, Gary and Doreen Kimball, who are watching today from back home in Florida,” as well as to be “thankful” for her sister.
Mizelle also called her husband, Chad, a “devoted partner, confidante, and friend.” Chad served as acting general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security under Trump.
After being nominated to her current seat on the bench, she was deemed “unqualified” for the position by the American Bar Association (ABA) due to a purported lack of experience. Specifically, it called attention to her eight years as a lawyers and compared it unfavorably to the twelve it typically seeks in federal nominees, citing that as the primary reason for its judgment.
Nevertheless, the ABA did acknowledge that she was in possession of “a strong work ethic and an impressive resume,” before going on to note that Mizelle is “delightful” and saying that “her integrity and demeanor are not in question.”
At her confirmation hearing, Mizelle submitted that her experience at the district and appeals court levels provided different, but very valuable lessons and skills, noting that clerking for a district court taught her the value of efficiency and impartiality, while her time at the appeals court gave her the opportunity to think more philosophically about the law. Most importantly, however, she touted her courtroom experience.
“I think my experience, in court, as a federal prosecutor is what makes me qualified to do this job. I’ve appeared and argued on behalf of the federal government 40 times in federal district court, I’ve conducted dozens of direct examinations of witnesses, I’ve prosecuted over 30 federal defendants, and I’ve handled complex, sophisticated matters,” argued Mizelle.
As examples, Mizelle noted that she prosecuted the largest sex-trafficking case in the history of the Eastern District of Virginia, and handled complicated tax fraud cases while at the Department of Justice.
Faced with a combative question about the ABA’s rating from Senator Dianne Feinstein (D., CA.), Mizelle expressed her disagreement with the legal organization by noting that contra the ABA, she had participated in many adversarial proceedings, putting “witnesses on the stand,” and arguing “contested detention hearings,” among others.
Mizelle also responded to a question from Senator Mike Lee (R., Utah) about how her jurisprudence would be influenced by those judges she had clerked for, including Justice Thomas, by stating that they all “had a commitment to applying what the law provided and not imposing their own will in a particular case.”
Lee also used his time to point out that the ABA “is not an accrediting body,” but rather just another interest group entitled to their opinions and positions, but without a special ability to discern whether nominees would make for fair and effective federal judges.
Comments
Post a Comment