Confirm Schott; the 7th circuit needs every jurist

In January, President Barack Obama nominated Donald Schott for a vacancy on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the nation’s longest appellate opening. Obama praised Schott’s exceptional dedication to the legal profession. For 34 years, Schott has practiced law with Quarles & Brady, a premier law firm. Because 2016 was a presidential election year, confirmations were delayed.

But because Schott is an outstanding, mainstream nominee and the court needs its full complement, he merits expeditious appointment.

Schott is particularly qualified to fill a 7th Circuit Wisconsin vacancy, which has remained open for more than six years, denying the state full representation on the appeals court. Since the 1980s, Schott has worked on a broad array of “legal issues including securities regulation, corporate governance, health care, and environmental disputes.” He earned the highest rating — well qualified — from the American Bar Assocation assessment committee. Schott resembles other highly competent, moderate Obama appellate court appointees.

Such courts best deliver justice when they have a full roster of judges because they promptly, inexpensively and fairly resolve caseloads. Judges who possess expertise in many legal fields improve comprehension and resolution of essential legal questions.

During Obama’s tenure, Republicans cooperated very little in the confirmation process. This was exacerbated once the GOP captured a Senate majority. The upper chamber approved only one circuit jurist all last year and one in 2016. That contrasts with the 10 appellate judges the Democratic majority helped appoint in 2007-’08 — the comparable juncture of George W. Bush’s presidency.

This year, Obama has proffered seven highly qualified, mainstream circuit nominees, but none has been confirmed. That means there are 13 circuit, and 38 emergency, vacancies. Critical is another 7th Circuit opening in Indiana for which Obama nominated Myra Selby. Because Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) did not return a “blue slip,” the Senate will not consider Selby, which makes Schott’s confirmation even more important. Slow confirmations have adverse impacts, depriving courts of necessary resources and many litigants of justice. Few circuits face challenges more daunting than the 7th.

The Senate must expeditiously consider Schott because it has a constitutional duty. Selection politics must not undercut consideration. Schott is an experienced attorney who has a lengthy, accessible record.

The Judiciary Commit- tee fully evaluated him and conducted his hearing on May 18. When introducing Schott, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) glowingly praised his qualifications and emphasized Schott’s long record litigating complex cases. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) did not attend, because he was chairing another hearing. However, Johnson returned his blue slip, which allowed a hearing, and he has praised Schott’s strong qualifications. Schott testified about his extensive civil litigation experience. Schott carefully answered senators’ questions, and they seemed satisfied.

The committee conducted a July 14 vote. The panel approved Schott 13-7 with four Republicans, including Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa favoring Schott. He deserved a prompt final debate and ballot. However, the Senate recessed Sept. 29 to campaign and didn’t vote. If Republicans continue to resist when they return for the lame duck session, Schott’s proponents must pursue cloture. Once his nomination reaches the floor, senators should conduct dignified and respectful debate and expeditiously vote.

Schott is an experienced, moderate nominee, and the court needs every jurist. The Senate must confirm him before it adjourns.

Carl Tobias is the Williams Chair in Law at the University of Richmond.