In a riveting session on Thursday, a pivotal moment unfolded as the U.S. Senate panel narrowly pushed forward the nomination of Adeel Mangi, poised to become the nation’s inaugural Muslim American federal appeals court judge. The move triggered heated debates, with Democrats accusing their Republican counterparts of deploying “blatantly Islamophobic lines of questioning and insinuations” against Mangi.
Mangi, a partner at the renowned law firm Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler and a resident of New Jersey, has been nominated for a seat on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. His nomination was one of the 19 presented by President Joe Biden for lifetime positions on the federal bench, and it now heads to the full Democratic-led chamber for consideration.
While the panel deliberated on multiple nominees, the spotlight remained fixed on Mangi. During a December 13 hearing, Senate Republicans delved into controversial topics such as the Israel-Hamas war and the September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center. The party-line vote of 11-10 in favor of Mangi’s nomination drew sharp criticism from Senator Dick Durbin, the committee’s Democratic chairman, who condemned what he deemed a “new low” of biased attacks against the nominee based on his religion.
Durbin remarked, “What is it about Adeel Mangi that attracts such criticism? We know what the starting point is: He would be the first Muslim American to be appointed to serve on the circuit bench.”
White House spokesperson Andrew Bates defended Mangi, describing him as “an indisputably qualified and experienced attorney” who faced “vile, unconscionable smears” and “hateful and undignified attacks” from a group of Republican senators.
The controversy surrounding Mangi’s nomination revolves around his association with Rutgers Law School’s Center for Security, Race, and Rights, where he served on the advisory board from 1999 to 2023. Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas raised objections to what he perceived as “anti-Israel, antisemitic” stances taken by the center and expressed concerns about Mangi’s views on terrorism and antisemitism.
The questions posed to Mangi during the hearings centered on events hosted by the center, including statements by its director, Sahar Aziz, and a 2021 event on the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attack featuring controversial speakers. Mangi, however, asserted his lack of awareness of these events and condemned the attacks, leading to a defense of his nomination.
Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, during the December hearing, pressed Mangi on his stance regarding the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas that triggered the war. Mangi responded by condemning the attacks, emphasizing, “The events of Oct. 7 were a horror involving the deaths of innocent civilians. I have no patience — none — for any attempts to justify or defend those events.”
On Thursday, Cruz pointed out nearly $20,000 in donations from Mangi and his firm to the center as evidence of support for its “radical political programming.” The contentious nomination of Adeel Mangi to the federal appellate court adds another layer to the ongoing debate within the Senate.
