Amy K. Matsui, Senior Counsel and Director of Women and the Courts

Wednesday, the Senate confirmed Michael Shea to the District Court of Connecticut. He had been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and thus ready for a vote before the full Senate on April 26, 2012 – over seven months ago. So for seven months, the people of Connecticut have been contending with an overburdened federal court system while a minority of the Senate refused to allow a vote on now-Judge Shea’s nomination.

As an article in the Hartford Courant detailed, “Two of Connecticut's eight federal judgeships are vacant and some of a half-dozen or so semi-retired senior judges – two of whom are 88 years old – carry substantial caseloads.” The article went on to note that “The shortage in Connecticut has not been classified an emergency. But federal litigants in the state now depend on jurists from states such as Arkansas, South Dakota and Montana to preside over scores of their civil trials.”

A recent article pointed out that the Oakland federal courthouse, in the Northern District of California, is home to six federal judges – three lifetime appointees and three magistrates – all of whom are women. Moreover, five of those six judges are women of color. This appears to be the first time a courthouse of this size has had an all-women bench, and stands in stark contrast to the overall representation of women in the federal district courts, which hovers around 30%.

Jeremy Fogel, the director of the Federal Judicial Center (on leave from the Northern District of California himself) noted that "It's not just the courthouse and the majesty of the building, the dignity of the courtroom, that matters … but are people in various positions in the judiciary someone they can identify with? From the standpoint of appearances, [an all-women court is] a good thing."