Why it Matters

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on eight nominations to the DC Superior Court and DC Court of Appeals on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, as the Trump administration moves to fill critical vacancies in courts that have repeatedly clashed with its policies. The hearing underscores the administration's urgency in reshaping DC's judiciary, where tens of thousands of cases remain unresolved and criminal trials run months longer than they did pre-pandemic. Some homicide and violent felony cases in DC will not see trial until 2027.

The Big Picture

DC's judicial selection process stands apart from every state in America. Unlike states with their own judicial selection processes, DC requires a federal process of presidential appointment and Senate confirmation for local judges. This has historically led to long delays in confirming new judges, perpetuating the vacancy crisis that has paralyzed the local court system.

The DC Court of Appeals has had vacancy problems that have gone unaddressed for years. The eight nominees came through the proper channels via the DC Judicial Nominations Commission as required by law. However, the commission itself has become a flashpoint in the broader fight over judicial power in DC.

President Trump formally transmitted nominations for the Court of Appeals nominees to the Senate on June 15, 2026, and formally transmitted nominations for several Superior Court nominees in April 2026. The DC Judicial Nomination Commission recommended Court of Appeals candidates as of April 1, 2026, and invited public comments on Superior Court applicants as recently as March 6, 2026.

This hearing comes as proposed legislation to eliminate the Judicial Nomination Commission and give Trump unilateral nomination power has gained momentum. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) introduced a Senate companion bill to H.R. 5125 and stated he was "proud my bill to abolish the DC Judicial Nomination Commission has passed the House." Kennedy characterized the DC Judicial Nomination Commission as "left-wing D.C. bureaucracy."

The Nominees

Two nominees are being elevated to the DC Court of Appeals, a fifteen-year appointment. James Andrew Crowell IV is a sitting associate judge in the civil division of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia being elevated to the Court of Appeals. He previously served in leadership roles at the Department of Justice and as a United States attorney in the District of Maryland, and has a long and distinguished career in the United States Army Reserves.

Stuart Gordon Nash is a partner at Holland and Knight, practicing in white-collar defense and governmental investigations. He previously served as an associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia from 2010 to 2016 and had a long tenure as a prosecutor at both the Department of Justice and the United States Attorney's Office in the District of DC.

Six additional nominees are being considered for the DC Superior Court, each for fifteen-year terms. Christopher Michael De Bono is senior counsel at the DOJ's Office of Legal Policy, where he leads efforts to develop and implement DOJ policy objectives concerning drugs, firearms, violent crime, and digital assets. He previously served as a senior attorney with the DEA's Office of Chief Counsel and has worked in private practice at multiple firms.

Michael Christopher DiLorenzo is a deputy chief in the national security section of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, investigating and supervising matters relating to national security. He has a long career as a prosecutor at the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of DC, and the State of Maryland.

Sharon Goodie is an administrative law judge for the District of Columbia in the Office of Administrative Hearings, where she has served since 2005. She hears matters involving public benefits, homeless shelters, nursing homes, and mental health group home issues and is a commissioner on the District of Columbia Access to Justice Commission. She was a prosecutor in the DC Attorney General's office before becoming an administrative law judge.

Craig Edward Leen is a partner at K&L Gates who previously served as director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs at the Department of Labor and as the city attorney for the City of Coral Gables, Florida. Notably, Leen previously served as Director of the Office of Government Ethics under both the Trump and Biden administrations.

Christine Macey is a deputy chief in the felony major crime section at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia. She previously served as a senior assistant United States attorney investigating and prosecuting homicide cases in the DC Superior Court and prosecuted fraud cases in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

John Barlow Timmer is a senior trial counsel in the enforcement division at the SEC who previously served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the U.S. attorney's office for DC, investigating and trying cases in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia ranging from assaults to homicides.

Political Stakes

These nominations represent a significant escalation in the Trump administration's effort to reshape DC's judiciary. The administration has faced repeated setbacks in DC courts, with observers noting that the U.S. Attorney's office "has lost the jury pool" in DC, according to CNN reporting in April 2026. The low win rate in the office reflects tension between the administration's prosecutorial ambitions and the realities of DC's jury pool and court system.

Fox News described DC court rulings as fueling a "growing clash over whether the judiciary is checking executive power or overstepping." The administration views these nominations as essential to shifting that balance.

For the nominees themselves, confirmation would represent significant career advancement. Crowell would move from the civil division to the appellate court, Nash would return to the bench after a decade in private practice, and the Superior Court nominees would join a court system in crisis, with the opportunity to shape its trajectory.

The stakes extend beyond individual careers. The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has jurisdiction over DC court nominations under the DC Home Rule Act. Confirmation of these eight judges would fill critical vacancies but would not resolve the underlying structural problem: DC's dependence on federal confirmation for local judicial appointments.

Yes, but:

Not everyone believes the current nomination process can be fixed. DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton has called for ending Senate confirmation of DC local judges entirely. Norton argues that Senate confirmation of DC judges is too slow and perpetuates the vacancy crisis.

The proposed legislation to eliminate the Judicial Nomination Commission represents a different approach to the same problem. Rather than streamlining the federal confirmation process, it would consolidate power in the presidency, removing the commission's role as a filter for judicial candidates.

This creates a political dilemma for senators concerned about judicial independence. Confirming these eight nominees addresses the immediate crisis, but endorsing the elimination of the commission raises questions about whether future presidents should have unilateral power over DC's courts.

What's Next

The hearing on Tuesday, June 23 was the first formal step in the confirmation process. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Rand Paul and with Gary C. Peters serving as the ranking member, will determine whether to advance these nominations to the full Senate.

If the committee approves the nominations, they advance to the full Senate for consideration.

The Bottom Line

Eight qualified prosecutors and judges are seeking confirmation to address a genuine judicial crisis in DC, but their confirmation alone cannot solve the structural problem of DC's dependence on federal approval for local judicial appointments.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article