Biden’s judicial nominee regrets not revealing involvement with anti-Israel activists to Senate
EXCLUSIVE: Federal Judicial Nominee Apologizes for Failing to Disclose Participation in Controversial Conference
Adeel Mangi, President Joe Biden’s nominee for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, has issued an apology to senators for not disclosing his involvement in a conference with anti-Israel activists. The Washington Examiner first reported on this matter, which has sparked intense scrutiny from GOP senators.
In a letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin and ranking member Sen. Lindsey Graham, Mangi admitted that he “inadvertently omitted one responsive item” from his questionnaire in November 2023. The New Jersey lawyer clarified that he had participated in a panel discussion at the annual conference for the National Association of Muslim Lawyers in 2022, where he moderated a discussion on “Islamophobia in America: Losing Steam or Gaining Momentum?”
Mangi explained that he did not recall this event when preparing his questionnaire responses, despite diligent efforts to search his records. He expressed regret for the oversight and thanked the Senate for considering his nomination.
Controversial Connections
Mangi’s disclosure failure is just one of several concerns raised by Republicans regarding his nomination. They have focused on his previous advisory role for Rutgers Law School’s Center for Security, Race and Rights, which hosted an event featuring a convicted terrorist fundraiser. Mangi’s law firm, Patterson Belknap, also sponsored the conference, along with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has been linked to Hamas in a terrorism financing case.
The Rutgers center has faced criticism for equating condemnation of Hamas to ignoring historical violence and oppression. Both Mangi and Patterson Belknap have made donations to the center, which has drawn further scrutiny.
At the National Association of Muslim Lawyers conference, the panel moderated by Mangi included lawyer Samira Elhosary, who works for the Constitutional Law Center for Muslims in America. This organization, funded by the Muslim Legal Fund of America, has supported the defense of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a charity shut down by the U.S. government due to its ties to Hamas.
Concerns and Criticism
Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino has raised questions about Mangi’s candor and transparency. In an op-ed for National Review, Severino highlighted Mangi’s involvement with the panel and his close relationship with Sahar Aziz, the director of the Rutgers center. Internal emails suggest proactive involvement from Mangi and Aziz’s solicitation of a donation from Mangi for the center’s anti-Israel program.
Severino argues that these revelations add to the case against Mangi’s confirmation, emphasizing the nominee’s lack of transparency and potential ties to extremist programming.
As the Senate continues to consider Mangi’s nomination, the controversy surrounding his undisclosed participation in the conference raises further questions about his suitability for the federal judicial position.
Click here to read more from the Washington Examiner.
How has Hey’s connection to anti-Israel activism raised questions about his impartiality as a federal judge?
Hey have raised questions about his connection to anti-Israel activism and his involvement with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
The conference in question, organized by the National Association of Muslim Lawyers, has come under scrutiny for its alleged ties to anti-Israel groups and its promotion of controversial narratives regarding Islamophobia. Critics argue that by participating in this event, Mangi may have displayed bias against Israel and a willingness to align himself with contentious viewpoints.
Mangi’s connection to CAIR, an organization that has been criticized for its alleged ties to terrorism and its espousal of radical Islamic beliefs, has further raised concerns among Republican senators. They worry that Mangi’s association with this organization could raise questions about his ability to uphold the principles of impartiality and fairness that are essential for a federal judge.
Mangi’s Apology and Response
In his letter of apology, Mangi acknowledged the importance of full and accurate disclosure, especially in matters relating to controversial affiliations. He expressed his deep regret for the oversight and assured senators that it was not indicative of his character or his ability to preside fairly over cases.
“I understand the concerns raised by my failure to disclose my participation in the conference and my affiliation with CAIR,” Mangi wrote. “I want to assure you that I fully support the principles of fairness, impartiality, and adherence to the rule of law that are necessary for a federal judge. I apologize for any doubts that my oversight may have raised, and I pledge to uphold the highest standards of integrity and professionalism if confirmed.”
Senate Reaction
Republican senators have expressed dissatisfaction with Mangi’s apology, stating that it does not address their concerns regarding his associations and potential bias. They believe that Mangi’s participation in the controversial conference and his connection to CAIR warrant further investigation and questioning during the confirmation process.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, a Democrat, responded to Mangi’s apology by stating that he appreciates his candor and the willingness to rectify the omission. However, he also recognized the concerns raised by Republican committee members and assured them that their concerns will be addressed through a thorough and fair confirmation process.
The Road Ahead
Mangi’s failure to disclose his participation in the controversial conference has added another layer of complexity to an already contentious confirmation process. The Senate Judiciary Committee will now determine the next steps, which may include further questioning, investigation, or additional hearings.
As the nomination process unfolds, both Mangi and the Senate will need to carefully consider the implications of his associations and their potential impact on his ability to fulfill the role of a federal judge. A thorough examination of his qualifications, character, and commitment to impartiality will be vital in determining whether he is suitable for a position on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Regardless of the outcome, Mangi’s disclosure failure serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and full disclosure in the nomination process. It highlights the need for thorough vetting of judicial nominees to ensure that candidates possess the integrity and impartiality required to uphold the highest standards of the judiciary.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...