Jennifer Elrod

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Jennifer Elrod
Image of Jennifer Elrod
United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit
Tenure

2007 - Present

Years in position

16

Education

Bachelor's

Baylor University, 1988

Law

Harvard Law School, 1992

Personal
Birthplace
Port Arthur, Texas


Jennifer Walker Elrod is a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. She joined the court in 2007 after being nominated by President George W. Bush.

Early life and education

Born in Port Arthur, Texas, Elrod graduated from Baylor University with her bachelor's degree in 1988 and from Harvard Law School with her J.D. in 1992.[1]

Professional career

Judicial career

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Nomination Tracker
Fedbadgesmall.png
Nominee Information
Name: Jennifer Walker Elrod
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit
Progress
Confirmed 189 days after nomination.
ApprovedANominated: March 29, 2007
ApprovedAABA Rating: Unanimously Qualified
Questionnaire:
ApprovedAHearing: July 19, 2007
QFRs: (Hover over QFRs to read more)
ApprovedAReported: September 20, 2007 
ApprovedAConfirmed: October 4, 2007
ApprovedAVote: Voice vote

Elrod was nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit by President George W. Bush on March 29, 2007, to a seat vacated by Judge Patrick Higginbotham. The American Bar Association rated Elrod Unanimously Qualified for the nomination.[2] Hearings on Elrod's nomination were held before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary on July 19, 2007, and her nomination was reported by U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on September 20, 2007. Elrod was confirmed on a voice vote of the U.S. Senate on October 4, 2007, and she received her commission on October 19, 2007.[1][3]

Noteworthy cases

Fifth Circuit declines to apply Chevron deference in bump stock ruling (2023)

See also: Chevron deference

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled 13-3 on January 6, 2023, that the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its statutory authority when it adopted a rule banning bump stock devices. Since the rule implemented criminal penalties for those found in violation, the court departed from prior appellate court reasoning on the issue and declined to apply Chevron deference to the agency’s changed interpretation of the underlying statutes.[4][5]

Following guidance issued by President Donald Trump (R) in 2018, the ATF changed its interpretation of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act to find that bump stocks qualify as machine guns and can therefore be prohibited. Gun owners and organizations challenged the rule, arguing in multiple lawsuits that the agency lacked the authority under federal law to issue the rule. Three appellate courts upheld the ban and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to reconsider the decisions—leaving in place a district court ruling that applied Chevron deference to the ATF’s changed interpretation of the law.[4][5]

After a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit upheld the ban in December 2019, the en banc court voted to enjoin the ATF rule. The majority concluded in part that the imposition of criminal penalties by a federal agency prompts the rule of lenity to supersede Chevron deference. Judge Jennifer Elrod, writing for the majority, argued that “Chevron deference shifts the responsibility for lawmaking from the Congress to the executive, at least in part. That tradeoff cannot be justified for criminal statutes, in which the public's entitlement to clarity in the law is at its highest.”[4][5]

The ATF had not commented on the ruling as of January 19, 2023.

Fifth Circuit finds constitutional flaws in SEC enforcement (2022)

See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit (Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Commission)

A divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on May 18, 2022, found a trio of constitutional deficits with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) enforcement proceedings that could affect the future scope of federal agency authority.[6]

The panel held in Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that the SEC administrative law judges’ (ALJs) two layers of removal protections unconstitutionally insulate them from presidential oversight; that the agency’s adjudication proceedings violate the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial; and that Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to the SEC by failing to provide the agency with an intelligible principle to guide its enforcement actions.[6]

“Congress has given the Securities and Exchange Commission substantial power to enforce the nation’s securities laws. It often acts as both prosecutor and judge, and its decisions have broad consequences for personal liberty and property. But the Constitution constrains the SEC’s powers by protecting individual rights and the prerogatives of the other branches of government,” wrote Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod in the opinion.[6]

SCOTUS reverses Fifth Circuit judgment on custodial rights under the Hague Convention (2010)

See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit (Abbott v. Abbott)

On May 17, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the judgment of a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit. Judge Jennifer Elrod delivered the opinion of the circuit panel.

Timothy Abbott, a British citizen, and Jacquelyn Abbott, an American citizen, were divorced in Chilean courts. Jacquelyn Abbott was awarded custody of their son and Timothy Abbott was awarded visitation rights. At Jacquelyn Abbott's request, the Chilean court entered an order that required the express mutual consent of both Timothy and Jacquelyn Abbott in order to remove their son from Chile. One year later, Jacquelyn Abbott moved with their son from Chile to the United States. Timothy Abbott sought an order in a federal district court to compel Jacquelyn Abbott to return their son to Chile under provisions of the Hague Convention. The district court denied the order, asserting that the child's removal from Child did not constitute a breach of Timothy Abbott's custodial rights under the Hague Convention. A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Jennifer Elrod, upheld the district court's decision. The panel ruled that the Chilean court's order and the divorce decree did not give Timothy Abbott custodial rights under the Hague Convention, but merely rights of access.

Writing for a six-justice U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Anthony Kennedy reversed the circuit panel, holding that Timothy Abbott's right to prevent his son's unilateral removal from Chile by his mother conferred a right of custody under the Hague Convention.[7][8]

See also

External links


Footnotes

Political offices
Preceded by
-
United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit
2007-Present
Succeeded by
-