Thomas Hardiman

Thomas M. Hardiman
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Assumed office
April 2, 2007
Appointed by George W. Bush
Preceded by Richard Lowell Nygaard
Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
In office
October 27, 2003  April 5, 2007
Appointed by George W. Bush
Preceded by William Lloyd Standish
Succeeded by Cathy Bissoon
Personal details
Born Thomas Michael Hardiman
(1965-07-08) July 8, 1965
Winchester, Massachusetts, U.S.
Political party Republican
Education University of Notre Dame (BA)
Georgetown Law (JD)

Thomas Michael Hardiman (born July 8, 1965) is a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Nominated by President George W. Bush, he began active service on April 2, 2007 and maintains chambers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He was previously a United States District Judge.

In 2017, Hardiman was a finalist to succeed Antonin Scalia as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, alongside eventual nominee Neil M. Gorsuch.[1] The next year, following Justice Anthony Kennedy announcing his retirement from the Supreme Court, Hardiman was once again considered a front-runner to fill the vacant seat.[2]

Early life and education

Hardiman was born in 1965 in Winchester, Massachusetts, and was raised in Waltham.[3][4] His father, Robert, owned and operated a taxicab and school transportation business and his mother, Judith, was a homemaker and bookkeeper for the family business.[3][4][5]

As a teenager, Hardiman began working part-time as a taxi driver, which he continued to do throughout high school and college.[5][6] In 1983, he graduated from Waltham High School.[7]

He was the first person in his family to graduate from college, receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Notre Dame on an academic scholarship and graduating with honors in 1987.[3][5] He then studied law at Georgetown University Law Center, where he served as an editor of the Georgetown Law Journal[3] and a member of the moot court team,[8] while working at law firms during the summers and academic terms to help pay his tuition.[9] He received a Juris Doctor with honors in 1990.[3][9]

Career prior to the bench

After graduation, Hardiman joined the Washington, D.C. office of the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, where he was an associate in the litigation department from 1989–1992.[3] From 1992–1999, he practiced with the Pittsburgh law firm of Titus & McConomy, first as an associate, and then from 1996–1999 as a partner.[9] From 1999–2003, he was a partner in the litigation department at law firm of Reed Smith, also in Pittsburgh.[3] His practice consisted mainly of civil and white-collar criminal litigation.[10]

Federal bench nominations and confirmations

Hardiman was appointed by President George W. Bush to be a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. He was nominated to that position on April 9, 2003, and confirmed by voice vote on October 22, 2003.[11] He received his commission on October 27, 2003 and took the bench on November 1, 2003.[3]

Hardiman was subsequently nominated to the Third Circuit by President Bush on January 9, 2007, to fill a seat vacated by Judge Richard Lowell Nygaard (who had assumed senior status in 2005).[11] Hardiman was confirmed to that seat by the U.S. Senate by a vote of 95–0 on March 15, 2007. He received his commission on April 2, 2007.[11][12] He was the seventh judge appointed to the Third Circuit by Bush.

Notable rulings

Police and prison powers

In Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders (2010), Hardiman held that a jail policy of strip-searching everyone who is arrested does not violate the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures in the Fourth Amendment.[13] The Supreme Court affirmed this decision in 2012.

In Barkes v. First Correctional Medical, Inc. (2014), Hardiman dissented from a ruling that two Delaware prison officials could be sued for failing to provide adequate suicide prevention protocols after a mentally ill inmate committed suicide. The Supreme Court agreed and unanimously reversed in Taylor v. Barkes.[14]

Capital punishment

Hardiman has generally voted in favor of the state and against inmates when deciding on cases centered on capital punishment. Most of the cases he has encountered involved disputes surrounding the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act a 1996 U.S. law in which limitations are placed on an inmate's ability to seek habeas corpus relief from their conviction, where he affirms the belief that the Act places a high standard on inmates which they usually cannot reach.[15][16] However, while joining the majority in favor of State of Delaware in Jackson III vs Danberg, the opinion he joined, written by D. Michael Fisher warned Delaware that the decision “should in no way be construed as license for Delaware to stay the worrisome course it appears to have taken at times under its former protocol" and that "[t]he record before us reflects an occasional blitheness on Delaware's part that, while perhaps not unconstitutional, gives us great pause. We remind Delaware not only of its constitutional obligation to ensure that the implementation of its new protocol does not run afoul of the Eighth Amendment's proscription of cruel and unusual punishment, but also of its moral obligation to carry out executions with the degree of seriousness and respect that the state-administered termination of human life demands."[15][16][17]

Criminal sentencing

In United States v. Abbott (2009), Hardiman held that a defendant's mandatory minimum sentence is not affected by the imposition of another mandatory minimum for a different offense.[18] The Supreme Court affirmed in 2010.

In United States v. Fisher (2007), Hardiman ruled that a judge could find facts to enhance a criminal sentence according to the preponderance of the evidence standard of proof.[19]

Religious freedom

In Busch v. Marple Newtown School District (2008), Hardiman wrote a dissenting opinion in favor of parents who described themselves as Evangelical Christians and were barred from reading from the Bible during a kindergarten "show and tell" presentation. Hardiman wrote that "the school went too far in this case in limiting participation in ‘All About Me’ week to nonreligious perspectives," which "plainly constituted" discrimination. Hardiman wrote that "the majority's desire to protect young children from potentially influential speech in the classroom is understandable," but that students cannot be barred from expressing "what is most important" about themselves.[20]

Gun rights

In United States vs. Barton (2011), Hardiman rejected a challenge to the federal law that bans felons from owning firearms.[21] However, in Binderup v. Attorney General (2016), he held that such a prohibition could cover only dangerous persons who are likely to use firearms for illicit purposes. He wrote "the most cogent principle that can be drawn from traditional limitations on the right to keep and bear arms is that dangerous persons likely to use firearms for illicit purposes were not understood to be protected by the Second Amendment."[22]

In the 2013 case Drake v. Filko, Hardiman filed a dissenting opinion arguing that the New Jersey requirement that gun owners must show a "justifiable need" to carry a handgun was unconstitutional. Hardiman cited the case District of Columbia v. Heller, writing that based on the Heller ruling, the Second Amendment "protects an inherent right to self-defense."[23][24]

Free speech

In the 2006 case United States v. Stevens, Hardiman voted to strike down a federal law that criminalized videos depicting animal cruelty.[25]

In the 2010 case Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle, Hardiman ruled that a police officer had qualified immunity because there was no clearly established First Amendment right to videotape police officers during traffic stops.[26]

In the 2013 case B.H. ex rel. Hawk v. Easton Area School District, Hardiman dissented from the court's holding that a public school violated the First Amendment by banning middle-school students from wearing bracelets inscribed "I [love] boobies!" that were sold by a breast cancer awareness group.[27]

In the 2014 case Lodge No. 5 of Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Philadelphia, Hardiman struck down a city charter provision barring police officers from donating to their union's political action committee, under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.[28]


In the 2010 case Valdiviezo-Galdamez v. Attorney General, Hardiman ruled in favor of a man from Honduras who was seeking asylum in the United States to avoid being recruited into a violent gang.[29]

In the 2015 case Di Li Li v. Attorney General, Hardiman opined that the Board of Immigration Appeals must reopen a case when an asylum seeker from China converted to Christianity and argued that "conditions have worsened over time" for Christians in China.[30]

In the 2017 case Cazun v. Attorney General, Hardiman concurred in the judgment to explain that the Immigration and Nationality Act unambiguously forbids aliens subject to reinstated removal orders from applying for asylum and the court should have held as much without resorting to Chevron deference.[31]

LGBT Community

In Brian D. Prowel v. Wise Business Forms, INC., Hardiman "wrote for the court in allowing a gender-stereotyping claim by a gay man who described himself as “effeminate” to go forward, reversing the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the company where the man worked, and which ultimately fired him".[32] Hardiman determined that the Mr. Prowel's case could move forward because he is allowed to argue that he faced discrimination for not conforming to the company's vision of gender norms.[33]


In the 2011 case United States v. Pendleton, a man who sexually molested a 15-year-old boy in Germany was convicted and sentenced in Delaware under the PROTECT Act of 2003. The defendant argued that the PROTECT Act was unconstitutional based on the Foreign Commerce Clause. Hardiman ruled that the PROTECT Act was valid because of an "express connection" to the channels of foreign commerce.[34]

In 2018, Hardiman held for the en banc court in Rotkiske v. Klemm that, contrary to decisions of the Fourth and Ninth Circuits, the statute of limitations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act begins to run when a violation of the Act occurs, not when the violation is later discovered.[35]

Affiliations and recognition

Before becoming a judge, Hardiman was a member of the bars of Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia.[3] Since 2013, Hardiman has served as chair of the Committee on Information Technology of the Judicial Conference of the United States.[36][37] As of January 2017, he was a member of the American Law Institute, a master of the Edward M. Sell University of Pittsburgh Chapter of the American Inns of Court, and a fellow in the Academy of Trial Lawyers of Allegheny County.[3][38]

In 2010 Hardiman received the Georgetown University Law Center's Paul R. Dean Award recognizing distinguished alumni.[3][9]

Personal life

Hardiman married Lori Hardiman (née Zappala), an attorney and real estate professional, in 1992.[39] The Zappala family, which includes Stephen Zappala and Stephen Zappala Sr., are prominent Democrats.[39][5] Hardiman is the father of three children.[40]

As a student, Hardiman participated in an exchange program in Mexico, and he later volunteered with the Ayuda immigration legal aid office in Washington, D.C., representing immigrants.[5]

Hardiman is a board member and former president of Big Brothers Big Sisters of Greater Pittsburgh.[3]

See also


  1. Hannon, Elliot (January 31, 2017). "Donald Trump Chooses Conservative Judge Neil Gorsuch to Fill Supreme Court Seat". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved February 15, 2017.
  2. "The Front-Runners and Full List of Potential Supreme Court Nominees". The New York Times. Retrieved June 27, 2018.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Thomas Hardiman & TFS Staff (February 1, 2017). "Hon. Thomas M. Hardiman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit". TFS Experts. Washington DC: The Federalist Society (TFS). Archived from the original (participant autobiogr.) on September 5, 2015. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  4. 1 2 Daniel S. Levine (January 24, 2017). "Thomas Hardiman: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know". New York, NY: Heavy, Inc. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 Sari Horwitz (January 28, 2017). "Judge Thomas Hardiman Has Taken an Unorthodox Road to the Federal Bench". The Washington Post. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  6. Ariane de Vogue (December 6, 2016). "Trump Could Bring a Different Kind of Diversity to the Supreme Court". CNN. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  7. "Judge Thomas Hardiman - "Dark horse" Supreme Court candidate with solid conservative credentials - SCOTUSblog". SCOTUSblog. January 30, 2017. Retrieved February 15, 2017.
  8. "Confirmation of Thomas Hardiman" (PDF). United States Congress.
  9. 1 2 3 4 Thomas Hardiman & Georgetown Law Staff (October 20, 2010). "Georgetown Law Honors Five Distinguished Alumni" (participant autobiogr.). Georgetown Law (online). Washington DC: Georgetown University Law Center. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  10. "Senate Judiciary Questionnaire" (PDF). Retrieved February 15, 2017.
  11. 1 2 3 Thomas Hardiman & FJC Staff. "History of the Federal Judiciary: Biographical Directory of Federal Judges". [Entry:] Hardiman, Thomas Michael (institutional autobiogr.). Washington DC: Federal Judicial Center. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  12. "U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session".
  13. "Albert W. Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlingto; Burlington County Jail; Warden Jude Cole; Essex County Correctional Facility; Essex County Sheriff Department" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. June 1, 2009.
  14. "Karen Barkes v. First Correctional Medical, Inc., et al" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. September 5, 2014.
  15. 1 2 "Potential nominee profile: Thomas Hardiman - SCOTUSblog". January 23, 2017.
  16. 1 2 Roeder, Oliver (July 6, 2018). "How Four Potential Nominees Would Change The Supreme Court".
  17. Fisher, D. Michael (February 1, 2010). "FindLaw's United States Third Circuit case and opinions". Findlaw. Retrieved 2018-07-10.  This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
  18. "United States of America v. Kevin Abbott" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. July 28, 2009.
  19. "United States of America v. Tracy Lamar Fisher" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. May 7, 2007.
  20. "Donna Kay Busch, in Her Individual Capacity and As the Parent and Next Friend of Wesley Busch, a Minor V. Marple Newtown School District; Marple Newtown School District Board of Directors; Robert Mesaros, Superintendent of the Marple Newtown School District; Thomas Cook, Principal of Culbertson Elementary School" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. June 1, 2009.
  21. "United States of America vs. James Francis Barton, Jr" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. March 4, 2011.
  22. "Daniel Binderup v. Attorney General of United States of America and Director Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms & Explosives" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. June 1, 2016.
  23. "U.S. Supreme Court rejects NJ man's appeal of gun-carry suit". May 5, 2014.
  24. "John M. Drake et al. v. The Honorable Rudolph A Filko" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. July 31, 2013.
  25. "United States of America v. Robert J. Stevens". Bloomberg L.P. July 18, 2008.
  26. "Brian D. Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. October 4, 2010.
  27. "B.H. Hawk & Relatives v. Easton Area School District" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. August 5, 2013.
  28. "Lodge No. 5 of Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Philadelphia" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. August 18, 2014.
  29. "Mauricio Valdiviezo-Galdamez v. Attorney General of United States of America" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. June 1, 2016.
  30. "Di Li Li v. Attorney General of United States of America". United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. September 15, 2015.
  31. "Cazun v. Attorney General of United States of America". United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. May 2, 2017.
  32. "Potential nominee profile: Judge Thomas Hardiman, a close second to Gorsuch and a shortlister again - SCOTUSblog". SCOTUSblog. 2018-07-02. Retrieved 2018-07-09.
  33. "These Are Trump's Candidates for the Supreme Court". Time. Retrieved 2018-07-09.
  34. "United States of America v. Thomas S. Pendleton" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. September 7, 2011.
  35. "Rotkiske v. Klemm" (PDF). U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
  36. "Terms Begin for New Conference Committee Chairs". October 4, 2013.
  37. Ariane de Vogue (January 24, 2017). "Examining the Top Contenders on Trump's Supreme Court List". CNN. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  38. Thomas Hardiman & NCJC Staff (2015). Speakers, Panelists and Special Guests: Circuit Judge Thomas M. Hardiman. Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference, July 13–15. San Diego, CA. Archived from the original (participant autobiogr.) on 2015-07-15. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  39. 1 2 Rich Lord (June 26, 2003). "Bush's Chosen One". Pittsburgh City Paper. Butler, PA: Eagle Media Corp. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
  40. Paula Reed Ward and Tracie Mauriello (January 24, 2017). "Pittsburgh judge Hardiman on Trump's short list for Supreme Court". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Further reading

Legal offices
Preceded by
William Lloyd Standish
Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Succeeded by
Cathy Bissoon
Preceded by
Richard Lowell Nygaard
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.