Judge nancy maldonado

Remember last year when ATF Director Steven Dettelbach was asked to define "assault weapon" in 15 seconds, and could only manage, "I'm not a firearms expert." This was the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. A couple of weeks later, given plenty of time to look up the definition of an assault weapon, Bettelbach again confessed to having no knowledge of assault weapons: "I don't hold myself out as a technical expert in every aspect of firearms," he told Congress. Seriously, name one competent person in the Biden administration. President Joe Biden's nominee for Seventh Circuit Judge Nancy Maldonado has said she'd be for an assault weapons ban, but when asked by Sen. John Kennedy what an assault weapon is, she took Dettelbach's route, saying, "I'm not a gun expert."Biden keeps calling for a ban on assault weapons, but none of the people under him can seem to define what an assault weapon is.WATCH:@SenJohnKennedy: “You said, ‘assault weapons may be banned because they’re extraordinarily dangerous and are not appropriate for legitimate self-defense purposes.’ Tell me what you meant by assault weapons?”Biden’s Seventh Circuit judge nominee Nancy Maldonado: “I’m not… pic.twitter.com/1ctY2E64IO— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) March 20, 2024"Biden’s Seventh Circuit judge nominee Nancy Maldonado: “I’m not a gun expert.”She's not a gun expert, but she knows they're not appropriate for legitimate self-defense purposes. Maybe she subscribes to Biden's belief that every American should own a shotgun and just blast through the door if they think there's an intruder outside.Bring in the biologist— Peter Rosenberger (@Hope4Caregiver) March 20, 2024Stands by her record of signing/rubber stamping things without knowing what she signed.. Interesting... Makes you wonder what else she's rubber-stamped without reading it or will....— Mike R (@I_am_Mutated) March 20, 2024 Recommended Will she recuse her self from ruling on gun cases then?— Peter Mckoogla (@PeterMckoogla) March 20, 2024None of these people should ever be allowed to make laws or decisions.— Savannah (@BasedSavannah) March 20, 2024There should be mandatory interrogation training for GOP members led by Sens. Kennedy, Cruz, and Cotton, Rep. Gaetz, and a few others.— Mike Paranzino (@mikeparanzino) March

A Biden-nominated candidate for a judicial seat couldn’t define the term “assault weapon” during a confirmation hearing on March 20, even though she once signed a brief defending a ban on “assault weapons.”Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) asked U.S. District Judge Nancy Maldonado of the Northern District of Illinois to define “assault weapons” during Wednesday’s nomination hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary.In posing the question, Mr. Kennedy cited a legal brief that Judge Maldonado signed years ago.“You said, ‘assault weapons may be banned because they’re extraordinarily dangerous and are not appropriate for legitimate self-defense purposes,’” Mr. Kennedy said. “Tell me what you meant by assault weapons.”Judge Maldonado, who has been nominated by President Joe Biden for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, struggled to reply to the question.“I did not write the brief,” she said, prompting the Republican senator to point out that she signed the brief and asked her whether in so doing she was “testifying to the court that everything in it is true.”Related Story“Yes,” she replied.“So they’re your words in terms of the court, right?” he asked.“You’re correct, Senator Kennedy,” prompting him to ask again what she meant by “assault weapons.”“I am not a gun expert,” Judge Maldonado then said, with Mr. Kennedy pressing the issue, asking her to “just tell me what you wanted to ban.”“I don’t remember the exact definition of ‘assault weapons’ in the ordinance that was at issue,” she said, before adding that she signed off on the brief but “was not responsible for researching the content.”‘Assault Weapons’ In FocusIn the exchange with Mr. Kennedy, Judge Maldonado acknowledged that she was “responsible” for the brief but insisted that she doesn’t remember its specific “characteristics” as they related to the ordinance on “assault weapons.”Asked pointedly whether

Gov. JB Pritzker and Jenny Thornley There will be no change of judges overseeing a politically charged lawsuit brought by the former head of the Illinois State Police’s disciplinary board against a woman he claims used her political connections to Gov. JB Pritzker to get him fired, after a newly appointed federal judge, who had earlier served on the State Police board under Pritzker, recused herself, cutting short a move by Chicago’s chief federal judges to reassign the case to the new judge. On Oct. 3, U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer, who serves as chief judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, signed an order reassigning the lawsuit filed by Jack Garcia, former director of the Illinois State Police Merit Board, against Jenny Thornley, a former Illinois state worker. The order would have transferred that lawsuit from U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman, to new U.S. District Judge Nancy Maldonado. Maldonado was appointed this summer to the court by President Joe Biden. Her appointment was hailed as the first of its kind for a Latino woman on Chicago’s federal bench. As Maldonado assumed her duties, the Executive Committee for the Northern District of Illinois ordered on Sept. 19 to redistribute dozens of cases from other federal judges to Maldonado, as part of her initial docket of cases. Garcia’s lawsuit against Thornley was one of those cases. However, that decision was quickly reversed in a new order issued by Judge Pallmeyer on Oct. 13. In that order, Pallmeyer indicated Maldonado recused herself from hearing Garcia’s case, because she had previously served as a member on the State Police Merit Board from 2019-2022. She had been appointed to that position by Gov. JB Pritzker. In Garcia’s lawsuit, he claims Thornley used her alleged political and personal connections to Pritzker to attempt to thwart an investigation into allegations of misconduct against her, and then to get him removed from his position as director of the ISP Merit Board. Thornley had initiated the court fight in April 2021, suing Garcia and the ISP Merit Board. She accused the Merit