“Mr. Mangi is 47 years old. If he feels he is not a viable option for the incoming administration, he can be considered again in the next administration in 2028 at age 51. If he’s not viable for that administration, he can be considered yet again in 2032 at age 55.”

That was Judge Singhal responding to Adeel Mangi's letter withdrawing his nomination for federal judge.

It's hard to summarize Mangi's letter or Judge Singhal's response. Read both of them. 

Here's a clip of Mangi's 4 page, single spaced letter: “When my nomination then came before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I was prepared to answer any questions about my qualifications, philosophy, or legal issues. I received none. Instead, I was asked questions about Israel, whether I supported Hamas, and whether I celebrated the anniversary of 9/11. Even more revealing, however, was the tone. The underlying premise appeared to be that because I am Muslim, surely I support terrorism and celebrate 9/11. ... [W]e have a fundamentally broken process for choosing federal judges. This is no longer a system for evaluating fitness for judicial office. It is now a channel for the raising of money based on performative McCarthyism before video cameras, and for the dissemination of dark-money-funded attacks that especially target minorities. Nominees pay the price and so too does our nation. Who will give up the rewards of private sector success for public service, if the added price is character assassination and wading through a Senatorial swamp like this one?”

And a portion of Judge Singhal's response: "Mr. Mangi clearly states that what he sets forth are his individual opinions, but the words he uses and the sentiment he conveys are seriously damaging to future qualified minority judicial candidates and require a response." More: "I wish Mr. Mangi had properly continued to fight for the appellate position and done so in a way that would inspire young people to follow his lead.  Had he done so, I would have supported him as I did after his initial nomination.  Instead, his actions show exactly why the advice and consent process and the separate roles of two branches of government to build the third branch are so vital. ... Truly, Mr. Mangi's letter reads like the defendant who tried to trick the court by accepting responsibility only to turn on his lawyer, the victim and the judge once he didn't like the sentence.  It's not the way a federal judge would or should act."

Gotta love Judge Singhal.  His path to the bench was not easy.  Had he written a letter like Mangi's after his first few attempts, we would not have him as one of our judges. I'm thankful he didn't!