Oppose the Nomination of Judge Jordan Pratt to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
View a PDF of the letter here.
OPPOSE THE CONFIRMATION OF JUDGE JORDAN PRATT TO THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Dear Senator:
On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 240 national organizations to promote and protect the rights of all persons in the United States, we write to express our strong opposition to the nomination of Judge Jordan Pratt to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The Leadership Conference intends to include your position on the nomination of Judge Pratt in our voting record for the 119th Congress.
The civil rights community has long understood that for there to be equal justice in America, our federal courts must serve everyone and recognize the rights of all of us. This means we must build an equal justice judiciary by ensuring that all who are selected and confirmed to serve in our judiciary are fair-minded and ethical, possess diverse demographic backgrounds and professional experiences, and have a demonstrated commitment to advancing the rights of all people. The president has declared himself king, regularly attacks judges and the judiciary, indicates that he will only nominate those who are loyal to him rather than to the Constitution and laws, and already has a record of selecting those who have been at the forefront of rolling back our civil and human rights. For the future of our multiracial democracy and our freedom, it is imperative that any and all nominees are fair-minded, well-qualified, and committed to civil and human rights. Unfortunately, Judge Pratt does not meet these standards and is unqualified to serve on the federal bench. His limited legal career has been focused on rolling back many of our civil rights protections in crucial areas, as we detail below.
Throughout his career, Judge Pratt has been involved in organizations that are the architects of the efforts to roll back our hard-won civil and human rights. Prior to his time on the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal, he worked at First Liberty Institute (FLI), an organization that frequently uses litigation to target LGBTQ equality and the rights to abortion and contraception. This is an organization that cultivated some of the most egregious anti-civil rights judicial nominees of President Trump’s first administration.[1] In addition, he was a Blackstone Legal Fellow with the vehemently anti-civil rights organization, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), as well as a mentor for other Blackstone Legal Fellows. ADF, classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, has “supported the recriminalization of sexual acts between consenting LGBTQ adults in the U.S. and criminalization abroad; has defended state-sanctioned sterilization of trans people abroad; has contended that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia; and claims that a ‘homosexual agenda’ will destroy Christianity and society.”[2] Judge Pratt is also an active member in the Federalist Society, and he currently serves on two of their executive committees, previously worked as a research assistant, and led the Tallahassee lawyers chapter.[3] This out-of-the-mainstream legal organization represents a sliver of America’s legal profession, and it has played a large role in shaping the judiciary to produce results that limit the recognition and advancement of civil rights laws and protections for all people.[4] Throughout his work with these organizations, and in his other legal positions, it is clear that Judge Pratt if confirmed would approach the bench with bias.
Hostility Towards Reproductive Rights
As an advocate and a judge on Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal, Judge Pratt has gone out of his way to roll back reproductive health care access and shows a disqualifying eagerness to reach beyond the role of a judge.
- Judge Pratt authored the opinion in Doe v. Uthmeier that upended Florida’s judicial waiver process for the parental notification and consent requirements for minors seeking abortion care.[5] A 17-year-old minor, Ms. Doe, sought a waiver from the court to allow her to obtain an abortion without parental consent, and the trial court denied her request.[6] When presented with Ms. Doe’s appeal, rather than simply affirming or overturning the lower court for further review, Judge Pratt took extraordinary steps to direct arguments on the constitutional issues that were not in front of the court since this case “may be the first and only opportunity of an appellate court of this state has ever had to address the constitutional question.”[7] In doing so, Judge Pratt created the opportunity for him to invalidate Florida’s judicial bypass law.[8] He reasoned that it was a violation of parental rights for a minor to have a medical procedure without the consent of their parents and stressed that the Florida constitution recognized broader parental rights than federal law does.[9] Because of Judge Pratt’s disturbing and stunning disregard for judicial norms to achieve a particular outcome in this case, Ms. Doe and many other minors are now unable to access abortion in Florida.
- While at FLI, Judge Pratt authored an amicus brief supporting Florida’s 15-week abortion ban.[10] He used extreme anti-abortion language, calling the procedure “barbaric” and “one of the most severe invasions of personal rights imaginable.”[11] He refused to even acknowledge a right to abortion, insisting on using scare quotes every time he referred to the “right” to abortion.[12] Further, he dangerously attempts to characterize supporters of access to abortion as violent and a threat to anti-abortion centers, ignoring the long history of violence and harassment faced by employees and patients of clinics that offer abortion services.[13]
Hostility to LGBTQ Rights
While at FLI, Judge Pratt authored an opinion piece attacking nondiscrimination protections for transgender and nonbinary students that require professors to use pronouns consistent with their gender identity.[14] He falsely claims this “government imposed orthodoxy” causes schools to “undercut their academic mission.”[15] This tired argument ignores the data continually proving that students who feel and are affirmed by their schools show improved grades and mental health, whereas disrespect and harassment due to their gender identity makes students feel unsafe and vulnerable.[16] Judge Pratt’s anti-LGBTQ bias has no place on our federal courts.
Judge Pratt is not qualified for this position, and we strongly urge the Senate to oppose his nomination to the Middle District of Florida. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact Lena Zwarensteyn, senior director and advisor of the fair courts program, at (202) 466-3311. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Maya Wiley
President & CEO
Jesselyn McCurdy
Executive Vice President of Government Affairs
[1] See e.g. Matthew Kacsmaryk nominated and confirmed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Caroline Kitchener & Ann E. Marimow, The Texas judge who could take down the abortion pill, The Washington Post (February 25, 2023); Oppose the Confirmation of Matthew Kacsmaryk to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, The Leadership Conference (December 12, 2017)); and Jeff Mateer, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and ultimately withdrawn after calls to do so because of his extremist views(Mark Joseph Stern, “Religious Freedom” Proponent Jeff Mateer Is the Most Dangerous of Trump’s Judicial Nominees, Slate (November 22, 2017); 36 LGBT Groups Demand Withdrawal of Jeff Mateer Nomination, Lambda Legal (October 16, 2017)).
[2] Alliance Defending Freedom, Southern Poverty Law Center (accessed July 7, 2025).
[3] Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees, U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary (accessed July 6, 2025).
[4] See Emma Green, How the Federalist Society Won, The New Yorker (July 24, 2022); Robert O’Harrow Jr. & Shawn Boburg, A Conservative Activist’s Behind-the-Scenes Campaign to Remake the Nation’s Courts, The Washington Post (May 21, 2019).
[5] Doe v. Uthmeier, No. 5D2025-1363 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., May 14, 2025).
[6] Id.
[7] Id. at 12.
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Brief of Amicus Curiae National Institute of Family and Life Advocates in Support of Respondents,
Planned Parenthood of Sw. and Cent. Fla. v. State, No. SC2022-1050 & SC2022-1127 (Fla. Apr. 6, 2023).
[11] Id. at 7.
[12] Id. at 10.
[13] Id. at 17.
[14] Jordan Pratt, A Tale of Two Colleges: The Right Way (and the Wrong Way) to Handle the Gender Debate, The Western Journal (Apr. 28, 2022).
[15] Id.
[16] The 2021 National School Climate Survey, GLSEN (accessed July 9, 2025).