Jacqueline Scott Corley

Northern District of California
	Ninth Circuit
Judgeships
	Posts: 14
	Judges: 14
	Vacancies: 0
Judges
	Chief: Richard Seeborg
	Active judges: Vince Girdhari Chhabria, Edward J. Davila, James Donato, Beth Labson Freeman, Haywood Stirling Gilliam Jr., Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, Eumi Lee, Rita Lin, Araceli Martinez-Olguin, P. Casey Pitts, Jacqueline Scott Corley, Richard Seeborg, Trina Thompson, Jon S. Tigar; Senior judges:; William Alsup, Saundra Armstrong, Charles Breyer, Edward Chen, Maxine Chesney, Phyllis Hamilton, Thelton Henderson, Susan Illston, William Orrick III, Jeffrey White, Claudia Wilken

Nomination Tracker
Nominee Information
	Name: Jacqueline Scott Corley
	Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Progress
	Confirmed 134 days after nomination.
	Nominated: November 3, 2021
	ABA Rating: Well qualified
	Questionnaire: Questionnaire
	Hearing: December 1, 2021
	Hearing Transcript: Hearing Transcript
	QFRs: QFRs (Hover over QFRs to read more)
	Reported: January 13, 2022
	Confirmed: March 17, 2022
	Vote: 63-36

Jacqueline Scott Corley is a judge on the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On November 3, 2021, President Joe Biden (D) nominated Corley to the court.^[1] She was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on March 17, 2022, by a 63-36 vote.^[2]^[3] To see a full list of judges appointed by Joe Biden, click here.

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California is one of 94 U.S. District Courts. They are the general trial courts of the United States federal courts. To learn more about the court, click here.

Corley was a federal magistrate judge for the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. She was appointed to this position on May 18, 2011, and served until her elevation to Article III judge in 2022.^[4]

Judicial nominations and appointments

United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Article III, 2022-present)

See also: Federal judges nominated by Joe Biden

On November 3, 2021, President Joe Biden (D) nominated Corley to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. She was confirmed by a 63-36 vote of the U.S. Senate on March 17, 2022, and received commission on March 30.^[2]^[3] To read more about the federal nominations process, click here.

Confirmation vote

The U.S. Senate confirmed Corley by a vote of 63-36 on March 17, 2022.^[3] To see a full breakdown of the vote on the official U.S. Senate website, click here.

Corley confirmation vote (March 17, 2022)
Party	Yea	Nay	No vote
Democratic	48	0	1
Republican	13	36	0
Independent	2	0	0
Total	63	36	1

Senate Judiciary Committee hearing

The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on Corley's nomination on December 1, 2021. The committee voted to advance Corley's nomination to the full Senate on January 13, 2022.

Nomination

On November 3, 2021, President Joe Biden (D) nominated Corley to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.^[1]^[2]

Corley's nomination was returned to the president at the sine die adjournment of the U.S. Senate on January 3, 2022.^[5] The president renominated Corley on the same day.^[3]

Corley was nominated to replace Judge William Haskell Alsup, who assumed senior status on January 21, 2021.^[2]

The American Bar Association rated Corley Well qualified with two recusals.^[6] To read more about ABA ratings, click here.

Biography

Education

Corley received her undergraduate degree from the University of California at Berkeley, and her J.D. from Harvard Law School.^[4] While at Harvard Law, she was selected as an editor and articles chair of the Harvard Law Review. She graduated magna cum laude.^[4]

Career

2011-present: United States District Court for the Northern District of California
- 2022-present: Article III judge
- 2011-2022: Magistrate judge
2009-2011: Partner, Kerr & Wagstaffe, LLP
2006-2011: Member, Northern District of California Alternative Dispute Resolution mediation and early neutral evaluation panels
1998-2009: Career law clerk, Honorable Charles Breyer

Corley practiced at the law firms Goodwin, Procter LLP in Boston and Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass, LLP in San Francisco before becoming Judge Breyer's career clerk. Upon graduation from Harvard Law School, Judge Corley clerked for the Honorable Robert Keeton of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.^[4]

About the court

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California is one of 94 United States district courts. It is headquartered in San Francisco, with courthouses in Oakland, San Jose, and Eureka. When decisions of the court are appealed, they are appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit based in downtown San Francisco at the James R. Browning Federal Courthouse.

The Counties of the Northern District of California (click for larger map)

The Northern District of California has original jurisdiction over cases filed within its jurisdiction. These cases can include civil and criminal matters that fall under federal law.

There are three court divisions, each covering the following counties:

The Oakland Division, covering Alameda and Contra Costa counties.^[7]

The San Francisco Division, covering Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Sonoma counties.^[7]

The San Jose Division, covering Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz counties.^[7]

To read opinions published by this court, click here.

The federal nomination process

Federal judges are nominated by the president of the United States and confirmed by the Senate. There are multiple steps to the process:

The president nominates an individual for a judicial seat.
The nominee fills out a questionnaire and is reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing with the nominee, questioning them about things like their judicial philosophy, past rulings or opinions, etc.

As part of this process, the committee sends a blue slip to senators from the home state in which the judicial nomination was received, allowing them to express their approval or disapproval of the nominee.

After the hearing, the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote to approve or return the nominee.

If approved, the nominee is voted on by the full Senate.
If the Committee votes to return the nominee to the president, the president has the opportunity to re-nominate the individual.

The Senate holds a vote on the candidate.

If the Senate confirms the nomination, the nominee receives a commission to serve a lifelong position as a federal judge.
If the Senate does not confirm the nomination, that nominee does not become a judge.

Noteworthy cases

Park Ranger’s use of taser ruled unlawful (2014)

On January 29, 2012, Gary Hesterberg took his two dogs to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. The area had just recently come under the protection of the National Park Service. Hesterberg kept his beagle, Jack, on a leash but allowed his rat terrier, Jojo, to roam free. Park Ranger Sarah Cavallaro was required to warn citizens in the park about the leash law, which had gone unheeded prior to the National Park Service taking over and was to start being enforced that day. Cavallaro attempted to warn Hesterberg; he initially lied about his identity and tried to leave. Cavallaro told him he was not free to leave. After refusing to put his hands behind his back and warning Cavallaro he had a heart condition when she pulled her taser, Hesterberg jogged away. Cavallaro fired the taser, striking Hesterberg in the back and causing him to fall face-first onto asphalt.

Cavallaro then cited Hesterberg for walking his dog off a leash, providing false information and failure to obey a lawful order. The local district attorney did not pursue the charges, but Hesterberg sued the National Park Service for battery and negligence. Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley found in favor of Hesterberg after weighing the facts of the case against the state of the law in the Ninth Circuit on taser use. Ultimately, Judge Corley found that Cavallaro acted unlawfully by using her taser against Hesterberg. She also found that Hesterberg was not a threat to Cavallaro or anyone else, despite being quite uncooperative, and Cavallaro did not provide an adequate warning before using the taser against Hesterberg.

The National Park Service was ordered to pay Hesterberg $50,000 for physical and mental suffering as a result of his confrontation with Cavallaro.

Articles: