Over the last eight years, Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden have remade the federal judiciary. The U.S. Senate approved 234 of Trump’s judicial picks in his first term, and 235 Biden nominees. Each is responsible for the appointments of just over a quarter of the entire federal judiciary.

But Nevada has been largely left out of either president’s effort to reshape the judiciary. Between the two presidents, only three judges whose chambers are in Nevada, of nine total, were appointed to the federal bench — and all replaced judges appointed by a president of the same party. 

The impressive nominating pace of both presidencies means that in his second term, Trump is unlikely to have much influence on the federal judiciary in Nevada. But his first-term impact on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where he appointed 10 of the court’s 29 judges, means that Nevada could be subject to more conservative judicial rulings in future cases. 

The federal courts are structured in three tiers — district courts, appellate courts and the Supreme Court. Nevada has just one federal district court — the District of Nevada — and is part of the 9th Circuit, the largest appellate court, headquartered in San Francisco and covering nine Western states. The Supreme Court, of course, sets law for the entire country — and Trump had a much greater impact than Biden there, with three appointments to Biden’s one.

But with no pending vacancies in the district court or 9th Circuit — and no obvious retirements coming up — the federal judiciary in Nevada is likely to stay as is for the next four years.

“I wouldn't expect to see an awful lot of judicial appointment action in Nevada during the Trump administration,” said Russell Wheeler, a judicial expert at the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies program. 

Appellate court

When Trump took office in 2017, the 9th Circuit was known as a liberal bastion among appellate courts, becoming a frequent thorn in the Republican president’s side. Judges in the circuit blocked the 2017 travel ban from majority-Muslim countries and upheld the constitutionality of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. 

Judges appointed by Democrats still maintain a 16-13 advantage, but with his 10 appointments to the 9th Circuit — including four flips — in his first term, the San Francisco-based appellate court is likely to be friendlier to Trump in his second term. 

Like other appellate courts, lower court case decisions in the 9th Circuit are reviewed by panels of three judges. If the majority of the judges disagree with the panel’s ruling, they can vote by majority to review the decision with an “en banc” panel. 

In other appellate courts, those panels include all of the circuit’s judges. But because the 9th Circuit is so large, “en banc” panels are made up of random selections of 10 judges — meaning a challenge to a Trump policy filed in the Democrat-friendly district courts could draw a panel of majority Republican appointees on appeal. 

“It was historically a reliably liberal circuit, to the point that it was a target for review by the more conservative U.S. Supreme Court,” Stempel said. “That changed pretty dramatically.”

Two 9th Circuit judges are stationed in Nevada — Judge Johnnie Rawlinson, a Bill Clinton appointee, in Las Vegas, and Judge Lawrence VanDyke, a Trump appointee, in Reno.

Rawlinson, who is 72 and has served on the 9th Circuit since 2000, has long been eligible for retirement. She expressed openness to taking senior status in 2022, on the condition that Biden nominate her former clerk Berna Rhodes-Ford — currently general counsel for Nevada State College and the wife of Nevada attorney general Aaron Ford — to be her replacement. 

But Rawlinson never ended up taking senior status; given her prior demand, it’s unlikely that she would retire in the next four years and give Trump the opportunity to appoint her successor. Through a communications administrator at the 9th Circuit, she declined to comment on her future plans.

VanDyke, meanwhile, was confirmed in 2019 after a controversial nomination process in which he was opposed by both Nevada senators and the American Bar Association, and is nowhere close to retirement eligibility. VanDyke, 52, was previously the solicitor general of Nevada under former attorney general Adam Laxalt, arguing federal cases on behalf of the state.

VanDyke has been a reliably conservative voice on the 9th Circuit, writing notable opinions and dissents asserting that gun stores were essential businesses during the COVID pandemic, that beauty pageants can exclude transgender women and that states’ abortion bans do not conflict with federal law mandating hospitals provide emergency care. 

Because the 9th Circuit is so large — and encompasses red, blue and purple states — it is likely to once again be a venue for challenges to Trump policies. And its rulings apply across the states in its domain — so rulings on cases coming out of deep-red Idaho, including numerous abortion ban cases — would apply in Nevada. 

The court has been divided over how to rule in the case of Idaho’s abortion ban, with legal challenges ongoing. Upholding an abortion ban in Idaho would not affect Nevada, but potential future lawsuits from Idaho’s Republican attorney general against the U.S. government or providers in states like Nevada that mail abortion pills, for example, would lead to rulings that affect the entire 9th Circuit.

In instances where numerous Democratic attorneys general sue the Trump administration, cases led by California will also be litigated in the 9th Circuit. 

Trump’s likeliest avenue to further influencing the 9th Circuit would be through the retirements of eligible judges appointed by Republicans. Three Bush appointees and one of Trump’s appointees from his prior term are eligible to retire or take senior status.

But even with limited opportunity for further influence, Trump’s legacy is already set in the moderation of the 9th Circuit — and his second term will test how much more of his agenda will be upheld by the court as a result.

“It's not that liberal bastion that it was known as maybe 10 or 20 years ago,” Wheeler said.

Knowing that, Democrats suing Trump may seek other venues to bring cases; they targeted the New England-based 1st Circuit, which has only Democratic appointees, for a lawsuit against Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship.

District court

The district court for Nevada has seven judges, all of whom were appointed by Democratic presidents — five by President Barack Obama and two by Biden. Biden’s appointments — and the Senate’s confirmation — of Judges Anne Traum and Cristina Silva filled two vacancies created by President George W. Bush appointees taking senior status, thereby flipping two seats. 

And of the seven district court judges, all are under age 60 except chief Judge Andrew Gordon. Judges are permitted to retire at their current salary or take senior status when the sum of their age and years of service on the bench total 80 years. Gordon will be eligible for retirement in 2028, but as an Obama appointee, it is unlikely that he would choose to resign his seat during a Republican administration.

Nevada’s district court composition is fairly typical for the 13 district courts throughout the 9th Circuit, in which 82 percent of appointments were made by Democratic presidents. 

Jeffrey Stempel, a UNLV law professor, said Democrat-appointed judges tend to be more sympathetic toward individual claimants while Republican appointees are more deferential toward institutional defendants. 

The District of Nevada has a reputation for fairness and lacks extreme judges, Stempel said — Obama appointees, in particular, are known to be more centrist. One piece of evidence: plaintiffs still tend to file in state courts — where juries tend to be more urban and damage awards tend to be bigger — despite the district court being entirely made up of judges appointed by Democrats, meaning the court is not necessarily considered a bastion of progressive jurisprudence.

“Defendants like [insurers] and product manufacturers tend to want to remove a case from state court to federal court in Nevada,” Stempel said. “They did that when the bench was more Republican, and they’re still doing it, even though the bench has five Obama appointees and two Biden appointees.”