Transcript:More and more federal judges appear to have it in for President Donald Trump’s unconfirmed appointees who are leading state prosecutions, according to a report by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. In a move similar to judicial bench ejections in New Jersey, a group of judges for the Eastern District of Wisconsin have refused to confirm Pam Bondi appointee Brad Schimel the permanent U. S. attorney, which makes his last day in office March 16. Schimel, a former state judge and prosecutor who knew Bondi from when they were both state attorneys general, according to the Sentinel, was named interim U. S. Attorney in November as Wisconsin's bipartisan nominating committee failed to come to a consensus on a nominee for the position. But interim U. S. attorneys are limited to 120 days. A majority of the judges could have made his appointment permanent, but declined with a March 10 order submitted by Chief Judge Pamela Pepper. The Sentinel reports the judges did not even take an official vote at the March 9 meeting. They just “decided they did not want to insert themselves into the process.”"The Court awaits the nomination and confirmation of a full-time United States Attorney by the President and United States Senate," Judge Pepper's stated. The court was carefully unopinionated about its refusal, but other opinions suggest Schimel’s reputation had soured on people. U. S. Senator Tammy Baldwin , Democrat from Wisconsin opposed his nomination and has criticized his continued hold on the office, even going so far as to call him a "failed politician" who had "no business being a top prosecutor in Wisconsin.”"I never thought a clearly partisan actor like Brad Schimel should be a top federal prosecutor in our state to begin with, and he certainly shouldn't get an extension for this job," the Sentinel reports Baldwin saying earlier in March. Schimel’s office was the one that won a guilty verdict in a high-profile case against former Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan, after a jury found Dugan guilty of obstructing federal immigration agents trying to arrest an undocumented immigrant. Critics called the prosecution politicized and designed to send a message to other judges opposing Trump’s immigration policies. Prior to his appointment, Schimel ran for a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in spring 2025, but lost to liberal candidate Susan Crawford by 10 percentage points, likely as a backlash against Trump . who had backed Schimel. Since Trump’s 2024 election, the president’s policies have made his endorsements the kiss of death to many Wisconsin Republicans, particularly in high-visibility races in 2025. Since 2025, Republicans have watched the state slip more thoroughly from their grasp, and more conservatives are set to retire from state judicial office this year.Our Analysis:The Judicial Cold Shoulder: A Dive into the Schimel SagaIn a tale that reads less like judicial procedure and more like a political drama, the Eastern District of Wisconsin's judges have delivered a stark message to President Donald Trump's administration by refusing to confirm Brad Schimel, a Pam Bondi appointee, as the permanent U. S. attorney. This decision, as reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, is a glaring spotlight on the intersection of politics and judicial appointments, revealing a battleground far removed from the ideals of impartial justice.The Unconfirmed: Schimel's Short-lived TenureBrad Schimel, a character whose career has been marred by controversy and partisan politics, found himself in the temporary position of U. S. Attorney, a role cut short by the very nature of its interim status. Interim U. S. attorneys, as the rules stipulate, have a shelf life of 120 days. a deadline that Schimel could not outrun. Despite the potential for a majority of judges to cement his role permanently, they chose, with a striking lack of ceremony, to abstain. The decision, wrapped in the neutral language of Chief Judge Pamela Pepper's statement, belies a deeper reluctance to engage in what is perceived as a fraught appointment process.The Silent Vote: The judges' choice to forego an official vote on March 9, as reported, speaks volumes. It's a strategic withdrawal, a decision to not "insert themselves into the process," which can be read as an indictment of the process itself. or more accurately, of Schimel's suitability for the permanent role.The Opposition's View: Baldwin's Blunt CritiqueU. S. Senator Tammy Baldwin's vehement opposition to Schimel's appointment underscores the divisive nature of his candidacy. Baldwin's description of Schimel as a "failed politician" with "no business being a top prosecutor in Wisconsin" is not just a personal attack. it's a public questioning of the meritocracy and impartiality supposedly inherent in the judicial appointment process. Her critique reflects a broader concern: that political affiliations and past actions are overshadowing the qualifications and neutrality demanded of such positions.The Politicization of ProsecutionThe article points to Schimel's office securing a guilty verdict in a high-profile case against former Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan as evidence of politicized prosecutions under his watch. This case, beyond its immediate legal implications, is presented as a symbol of the Trump administration's broader agenda against dissenting voices, particularly in the context of immigration policy. It's an instance where legal action appears inextricably linked with political messaging, further complicating Schimel's legacy and his suitability for the U. S. Attorney role.The Trump Factor: A Political AlbatrossThe broader narrative of Trump's influence on Wisconsin politics provides a crucial backdrop to Schimel's saga. His endorsement, once a coveted seal of approval, has seemingly become toxic. Schimel's unsuccessful bid for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, marred by Trump's backing, is a case in point. The article suggests that Trump's policies and endorsements have led to a political backlash in Wisconsin, contributing to a Republican retreat from state judicial offices.Conclusion: A Reflection of Deeper DividesThe refusal to confirm Brad Schimel as the permanent U. S. Attorney is more than a procedural footnote. it's a manifestation of the deep divides within American politics and its judiciary. The judges' silent rebuke is a commentary on the politicization of judicial appointments, the contentious nature of Trump's endorsements, and the ongoing struggle for a judiciary that transcends partisan interests. As the curtain falls on Schimel's brief tenure, the episode serves as a poignant reminder of the challenges facing the American judicial system in an era of unprecedented political polarization.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com