Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Carson served on New Mexico GovernorSusana Martinez's energy and environment transition teams following her election in 2010. He is a member of the New Mexico Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission.
On December 20, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated Carson to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, to the seat that was vacated by Judge Paul Joseph Kelly Jr., who subsequently assumed senior status on December 31, 2017. On February 14, 2018, a hearing on his nomination was held before the Senate Judiciary Committee. On March 15, 2018, his nomination was reported out of committee by a 15–6 vote. On May 11, 2018, the United States Senate invoked cloture on his nomination by a 71–24 vote. On May 15, 2018, his nomination was confirmed by a 77–21 vote. He received his commission on May 17, 2018. He was sworn in on May 18, 2018.
Notable cases
First Amendment
Writing for the panel in Vogt v. Rodebush, Carson recognized that the First Amendment prevents public employers from conditioning employment on political beliefs, affiliation, or non-affiliation. Carson held that the First Amendment enables employees to refuse "a candidate all support, or only some forms of support," because, whether the refusal is "partial or complete," the employee is choosing to exercise her First Amendment right of political affiliation by refusal.
Fourteenth Amendment
In Doe v. Rocky Mountain Classical Academy, the Defendant suspended and disenrolled the Plaintiff because he wore earrings at school, violating school's dress code which permitted girls (but not boys) to wear earrings. Plaintiff argued that the school violated his right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court held that the school did not violate Plaintiff's equal protection rights because the dress code imposed "comparable burdens" on both boys and girls. Carson, writing for a unanimous panel of the Tenth Circuit, reversed, holding that the district court had erred "by applying the comparable burdens test instead of intermediate scrutiny." But Carson noted that the opinion did not "address whether comparable burdens are relevant to a proper intermediate scrutiny analysis."
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.