Patricia Ann Millett

Patricia Ann Millett is an American jurist who has served as a circuit judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia since her confirmation in December 2013. Appointed by President Barack Obama, she brings extensive experience from private practice, the Department of Justice, and the Office of the Solicitor General, including a record number of appearances before the Supreme Court for a female attorney at the time of her appointment. Her career has intersected with significant procedural developments in the Senate’s confirmation process and she has been mentioned as a potential nominee to the nation’s highest court.

Early life and legal career

Patricia Millett was born in September 1963 in Dexter, Maine, and spent much of her childhood in Marine, Illinois. She is the daughter of historian and author Richard L. Millett. Demonstrating academic aptitude early on, she completed a Bachelor of Arts in political science at the University of Illinois Urbana‑Champaign in 1985, graduating summa cum laude. She continued her studies at Harvard Law School, where she earned a Juris Doctor in 1988 with magna cum laude honors.

Following law school, Millett entered private practice as an associate in the litigation department of Miller & Chevalier, a Washington, D.C., firm, where she worked from 1988 until 1990. She then served a two‑year clerkship with Judge Thomas Tang of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, gaining insight into appellate adjudication.

In 1992 Millett joined the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, working on its appellate staff. During her four‑year tenure she briefed and argued more than twenty cases before federal appellate courts and occasionally before state appellate tribunals, honing her advocacy skills in complex civil litigation.

Millett’s most formative government experience began in August 1996 when she became an assistant to the United States Solicitor General. Over eleven years in that role she argued twenty‑five cases before the Supreme Court of the United States and prepared briefs for more than fifty additional petitions. Among the notable briefs she authored were the Solicitor General’s submissions in *Tennessee v. Lane*, defending the constitutionality of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and *Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs*, upholding the Family and Medical Leave Act.

After leaving the Solicitor General’s office in September 2007, Millett entered private practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, D.C. At Akin Gump she co‑chaired the firm’s Supreme Court practice alongside Tom Goldstein, representing clients in high‑profile matters such as *Samantar v. Yousuf*, which addressed the scope of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act with respect to former foreign officials accused of torture. In addition to her litigation work, Millett contributed occasional commentary to SCOTUSblog beginning in October 2007, reflecting a continued engagement with Supreme Court developments.

Federal appellate service

Millett’s first public consideration for an appellate judgeship emerged in early 2009 when the Virginia Bar Association listed her among five Virginia‑resident attorneys recommended for a vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The Virginia State Bar subsequently rated her as “highly qualified” for that opening, although no nomination materialized.

The prospect of a federal appellate appointment resurfaced in 2013 when President Barack Obama was reported to be evaluating candidates for three vacancies on the District of Columbia Circuit. On June 4 2013 the president formally nominated Millett to fill the seat previously occupied by Judge John Roberts, who had been elevated to the Supreme Court in 2005. The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on her nomination on July 10 and reported it to the full Senate on August 1 with a party‑line vote of ten to eight.

Millett’s confirmation process became entwined with a broader partisan dispute over the use of the filibuster for judicial nominees. On October 28, 2013 Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid moved to invoke cloture on her nomination; the motion was defeated on October 31 by a vote of fifty‑five to thirty‑eight, with three senators recorded as present but not voting. A second cloture attempt on November 21 also failed, this time by a margin of fifty‑seven to forty, again with three present votes. Subsequent procedural maneuvers led the Senate to confront the question of whether a simple majority could end debate on executive and judicial nominations—a controversy commonly referred to as the “nuclear option.” A vote on that procedural question resulted in a narrow defeat for the effort to lower the cloture threshold, but the episode set the stage for later changes to Senate rules.

Despite the contentious atmosphere, Millett’s nomination ultimately proceeded to a final confirmation vote. On December 10 2013 the Senate confirmed her by a simple majority, and she received her commission that same day, becoming an active circuit judge on the District of Columbia Circuit. Her appointment contributed to the gradual shift in the composition of the nation’s second‑most influential appellate court, which handles many cases involving federal agencies and administrative law.

Jurisprudence and legacy

Throughout her career, Patricia Millett has been distinguished by a substantial record of Supreme Court advocacy. By the time of her confirmation she had argued thirty‑two cases before the nation’s highest court—a tally that set a new benchmark for female attorneys at that point in history. Her experience includes both oral arguments and extensive briefing work on matters ranging from civil rights to federal employment statutes.

In her capacity as an assistant to the Solicitor General, Millett played a central role in defending key provisions of landmark legislation. The *Tennessee v. Lane* brief she authored helped preserve access rights for individuals with disabilities under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, while the *Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs* brief supported the constitutionality of the Family and Medical Leave Act, reinforcing workers’ entitlement to unpaid leave for family and medical reasons.

Millett’s private‑practice successes further illustrate her impact on evolving areas of law. The victory in *Samantar v. Yousuf* contributed to jurisprudence concerning the limits of sovereign immunity, particularly as it applies to former foreign officials implicated in human‑rights violations. Her leadership of Akin Gump’s Supreme Court practice positioned her as a prominent figure guiding complex appellate strategies for corporate and individual clients.

Beyond courtroom achievements, Millett has been recognized as a potential candidate for elevation to the United States Supreme Court. In February 2016 The New York Times identified her among several individuals under consideration to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, underscoring her prominence within the legal community and the breadth of experience she brings to federal adjudication.

Millett’s tenure on the D.C. Circuit has coincided with a period of heightened scrutiny over judicial appointments and Senate confirmation procedures. While specific opinions authored by her are not detailed in the available sources, her presence on a court that frequently reviews agency actions and constitutional questions situates her at the forefront of contemporary federal jurisprudence. Her background—spanning government service, private practice, and scholarly commentary—provides a multifaceted perspective that informs her contributions to appellate decision‑making.

In sum, Patricia Ann Millett’s professional trajectory reflects a blend of high‑level advocacy, substantive legal scholarship, and participation in pivotal institutional debates. Her record of Supreme Court appearances, involvement in significant statutory defenses, and role in the evolving dynamics of Senate confirmations collectively shape a legacy that continues to influence both the practice of law and the development of federal jurisprudence.