Michael Baylson

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Michael Baylson
Image of Michael Baylson
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (senior status)
Tenure

2012 - Present

Years in position

12

Prior offices
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Education

Bachelor's

University of Pennsylvania, 1961

Law

University of Pennsylvania, 1964

Personal
Birthplace
Philadelphia, Pa.

Michael Baylson is a federal judge serving on senior status for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He joined the court in 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush. He assumed senior status on July 13, 2012.

Early life and education

Born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Baylson graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with his bachelor's degree in 1961 and with his Law degree in 1964.[1]

Professional career

Baylson began his legal career as a law clerk for Common Pleas Judge Joseph Sloane in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County in 1965 before serving as Assistant District Attorney for the Philadelphia County District Attorney's Office from 1966 to 1970. Baylson, entered private practice in the State of Pennsylvania from 1970 to 1988.[1]

In 1988, on the recommendation of U.S. Senators John Heinz III and Arlen Specter, Baylson was nominated by President George W. Bush as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania where he served until 1983.[1]

Judicial career

Eastern District of Pennsylvania

On the recommendation of U.S. Senators Rick Santorum and Arlen Specter, Baylson was nominated to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George H.W. Bush on January 23, 2002, to a seat vacated by Robert Kelly. Baylson was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 30, 2002 on a unopposed 98-0-2 Senate vote and received commission on June 19, 2002.[2][3] He assumed senior status on July 13, 2012.

Noteworthy cases

Judge prevents denial of funds over Philadelphia's status as a sanctuary city (2017)

See also: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (The City of Philadelphia v. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, Attorney General of the United States)

On November 15, 2017, Judge Michael Baylson of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued a memorandum opinion and order granting a motion for a preliminary injunction that prevented the federal government from denying federal funds to the city of Philadelphia under an Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) for FY 2017. The government announced in July of 2017 that it was withholding JAG funds from sanctuary cities, which is a term used to describe cities that have enacted policies which limit the involvement of local officials in the enforcement of federal immigration law. The government implemented new criteria to receive JAG funds in July and justified withholding the funds from Philadelphia based on these criteria. Judge Baylson rejected the government’s argument for withholding the funds, holding that Philadelphia was “likely to succeed in its claims that the Department of Justice’s conditions are improper under settled principles of the Spending Clause, the Tenth Amendment, and principles of federalism.”[4]

On June 6, 2018, Judge Baylson ruled for Philadelphia, saying that the city was entitled to receive prompt JAG funds and that the Trump administration's attempt to withhold federal funds from the city "violates statutory and constitutional law." A spokesman for the Department of Justice, Devin O'Malley, said Baylson's decision was "a victory for criminal aliens in Philadelphia, who can continue to commit crimes in the city knowing that its leadership will protect them from federal immigration officers whose job it is to hold them accountable and remove them from the country." Miriam Enriquez, head the city Office of Immigrant Affairs, said the ruling "should reaffirm to our immigrant communities that we are glad you are here, we want you here, we will always fight to ensure that Philadelphia remains a welcoming city to all."[5]

Pennsylvania congressional map upheld

On January 10, 2018, a panel of federal judges in Pennsylvania dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Pennsylvania's congressional map. The case concerns the congressional map passed by the Republican-controlled General Assembly in 2011. The plaintiffs alleged that the congressional map violated the Elections Clause of the United States Constitution. They claimed that the map was gerrymandered to ensure Republican control in many districts. By a 2-1 vote, the panel upheld the 2011 map. However, each judge on the panel wrote a separate opinion--the two judges in the majority did not agree on the reason for upholding the map. Judge Brooks Smith and Judge Patty Shwartz made up the majority. Judge Michael Baylson dissented.

Judge Smith would have ruled that the plaintiffs' claims were not within the court's power to resolve. He wrote, "The structural change Plaintiffs seek must come from the political branches or from the political process itself, not the courts. For these reasons, I would hold that the Elections Clause claim raises a non-justiciable political question."[6]

Judge Patty Shwartz agreed that the map should be upheld, but she would have ruled that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the case: "Plaintiffs lack standing to bring a statewide challenge to the map because they have not presented a plaintiff from each congressional district who has articulated a concrete and particularized injury in fact." However, she continued, even if the plaintiffs did have standing, "Their claim would still fail because the legal test they propose for an Elections Clause claim is inconsistent with established law."[7]

Finally, Judge Michael Baylson dissented. Baylson would have ruled that the map constituted unconstitutional gerrymandering. He wrote that while the United States Supreme Court had not previously ruled on a gerrymandering claim under the Elections Clause, he believed Supreme Court precedent had established standards for fair congressional maps. Under those standards, he wrote, he believed the plaintiffs had proved their case.[8]

See also

External links

Footnotes

Political offices
Preceded by:
Robert Kelly
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
2002–2012
Succeeded by:
Wendy Beetlestone