Thomas Hardiman facts for kids

Thomas Michael Hardiman (born July 8, 1965) is a United States circuit judge. He works for a special court called the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. President George W. Bush chose him for this job, and he started working on April 2, 2007.

Judge Hardiman works in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Before this, he was a judge in a different court, called a United States district court. In 2017 and 2018, he was considered for a very important job. This was to become an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States.

Early Life and School

Thomas Hardiman was born in 1965 in Winchester, Massachusetts. He grew up in Waltham. His dad owned a business that ran taxicabs and school transportation. His mom was a homemaker and helped with the family business.

When he was a teenager, Hardiman started driving a taxi part-time. He kept doing this through high school and college. He finished Waltham High School in 1983.

He was the first person in his family to go to college. He earned a degree from the University of Notre Dame in 1987. He got a scholarship and graduated with honors. Then, he went to law school at Georgetown University Law Center. He worked at law firms during his studies to help pay for tuition. He graduated from law school with honors in 1990.

Early Career as a Lawyer

After law school, Hardiman worked at a law firm in Washington, DC. He was a lawyer in the litigation department from 1989 to 1992. Litigation means handling lawsuits.

From 1992 to 1999, he worked at a law firm in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He became a partner there in 1996. From 1999 to 2003, he was a partner at another law firm in Pittsburgh. He mostly worked on civil cases and white-collar criminal cases.

Becoming a Federal Judge

District Court Judge

President George W. Bush chose Thomas Hardiman to be a judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. He was officially nominated on April 9, 2003. The Senate approved him on October 22, 2003. He started his job as a district court judge on October 27, 2003. He served in this role until April 5, 2007.

Court of Appeals Judge

President Bush then nominated Hardiman for a higher court. This was the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He was nominated on January 9, 2007. The Senate approved him on March 15, 2007, with a vote of 95 to 0. He officially became a circuit judge on April 2, 2007.

Important Decisions

Judge Hardiman has made many important decisions during his time as a judge. Here are some examples of his rulings.

Police and Prison Rules

• In a 2010 case, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, Hardiman said that jails could strip-search everyone who was arrested. He believed this did not go against the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court later agreed with his decision.
• In 2014, in Barkes v. First Correctional Medical, Inc., Hardiman disagreed with a ruling. He thought prison officials should not be sued for not having good suicide prevention plans. The Supreme Court later agreed with him.

Death Penalty Cases

Judge Hardiman has often sided with the state in cases about the death penalty. He believes that a law from 1996, called the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, sets a very high standard for inmates. This makes it hard for them to challenge their convictions.

Criminal Sentences

Hardiman has ruled in favor of longer sentences in some criminal cases.

• In United States v. Abbott (2009), he said that a person's minimum sentence is not changed by other mandatory sentences. The Supreme Court later agreed with this decision in 2010.
• In United States v. Fisher (2007), he ruled that a judge could find facts to make a criminal sentence longer.

Religious Freedom

• In Busch v. Marple Newtown School District (2008), Hardiman wrote a different opinion. He supported parents who were not allowed to read from the Bible during a "show and tell" at school. He felt the school went too far in limiting religious expression.
• However, in 2019, Hardiman wrote an opinion that allowed a Christian cross to stay on the Lehigh County Seal. He argued that the cross had become a familiar part of the county's history.
• In Groff v. Dejoy (2022), Hardiman wrote a different opinion. He supported a postal worker who wanted to observe the Sabbath for religious reasons. He questioned a past Supreme Court rule about how much employers need to accommodate religious practices. The Supreme Court later reviewed the case and agreed with Hardiman's view.

Gun Rights

• In United States vs. Barton (2011), Hardiman supported the federal law that stops felons from owning guns.
• But in Binderup v. Attorney General (2016), he said this ban should only apply to dangerous people. He believed the Second Amendment protects the right to own guns for self-defense.
• In 2013, in Drake v. Filko, Hardiman disagreed with a New Jersey law. This law required gun owners to show a "justifiable need" to carry a handgun. He argued this was against the Second Amendment.
• In Range v. Attorney General (2023), Hardiman wrote the main opinion for the court. He said that the federal law banning gun ownership for felons was unconstitutional for a man convicted of making false statements about food stamps.

Free Speech

• In United States v. Stevens (2008), Hardiman voted to strike down a law that made videos showing animal cruelty illegal.
• In Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle (2010), Hardiman ruled that a police officer was protected. This was because there was no clear rule that people had a First Amendment right to videotape police during traffic stops.
• In B.H. ex rel. Hawk v. Easton Area School District (2013), Hardiman disagreed with the court's decision. The court said a school could not ban bracelets that promoted breast cancer awareness.
• In Lodge No. 5 of Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Philadelphia (2014), Hardiman struck down a city rule. This rule stopped police officers from donating to their union's political group. He said this violated the First Amendment.

Immigration Cases

• In Valdiviezo-Galdamez v. Attorney General (2010), Hardiman ruled in favor of a man from Honduras. The man was seeking safety in the United States to avoid a violent gang.
• In Di Li Li v. Attorney General (2015), Hardiman decided that an asylum seeker from China could have her case reopened. She had become a Christian, and conditions for Christians in China had become worse.

LGBT Issues

• In Brian D. Prowel v. Wise Business Forms, INC., Hardiman wrote for the court. He allowed a case to move forward for a gay man who said he was treated unfairly. The man felt he was discriminated against for not fitting certain gender ideas at his workplace.

Business and Trade

• In United States v. Pendleton (2011), Hardiman ruled that a law about child exploitation was valid. This was even if the crime happened in another country. He said the law had a clear connection to international trade.
• In 2018, in Rotkiske v. Klemm, Hardiman ruled that the time limit for a certain debt collection law starts when the violation happens. It does not start when the violation is found later.

Other Activities and Awards

Before becoming a judge, Hardiman was a member of the bar associations in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and District of Columbia. Since 2013, he has led a committee on information technology for the Judicial Conference of the United States. He is also a member of the American Law Institute.

In 2010, Hardiman received an award from Georgetown University Law Center. This award recognized him as a distinguished former student.

Personal Life

Thomas Hardiman married Lori Hardiman (née Zappala) in 1992. She is also a lawyer. They have three children. Hardiman is Roman Catholic.

When he was a student, Hardiman took part in an exchange program in Mexico. He also volunteered at a legal aid office that helped immigrants.

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

See also

• Donald Trump Supreme Court candidates