On the same day that President Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, he also nominated James Wynn to the Ohio Judicial Panel.
Wynn is an associate professor at Ohio State University, and he was previously a judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Wynner is one of the five judges on the panel that currently presides over the state’s most populous court.
Wynners nomination was widely criticized for his history of judicial activism, including opposing same-sex marriage and abortion rights.
But Wynn’s nomination came in a year when Republicans controlled both the state House and the Senate, so he had a chance to become the next justice in line to fill Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat.
But when he was confirmed, it was overwhelmingly Democratic and he lost his confirmation vote.
Wynnen also made a name for himself as an advocate for gun rights, supporting the Brady Bill in 2004.
In 2017, Wynn was among a number of judges on a panel that wrote the executive order that President Trump signed on March 10, banning immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries.
In the order, Wynner and the other judges ruled that it would not be illegal for the Trump administration to temporarily suspend refugee admissions from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen, as well as to deny visas to those from those countries.
“It was a very, very, serious decision,” Wynn said of the order in 2017.
“But it also gave the president the ability to take the refugees from those seven countries that are at the top of the list, which are not even considered terrorist, and to take people that are already here and put them in a camps.”
Wynn had previously criticized Trump for refusing to meet with him on his nomination.
He told The Hill that he was disappointed that Wynn “was not invited” to the White House, adding that “I have no intention of ever doing that again.”
Wynner told The Verge that he would have “done it” had he been able to attend the meeting, but that he “wasn’t invited” due to scheduling conflicts.
He said that he thought he would be able to make it to the meeting on the basis of his credentials, but “I think it would have been better if they had offered me the opportunity to attend.”
Wynned said that if the executive action had been revoked, he would not have been able “to get the visas, and that would have created a whole different set of problems.”
“If we were on the side of the American people, we would have seen a whole new set of issues.”
Wynns nomination was the first judicial nomination for Trump in a decade, and his first as the Republican president.
The next president will likely pick a replacement for Wynn, as the Ohio Republican Party plans to hold a special nominating convention this year to pick a new nominee.
The Democratic Party has no plans to do so, and its members have expressed a willingness to nominate a moderate.
If the Democratic Party chooses a nominee, the next nominee will be appointed by the Senate.
But the Trump Administration has made it clear that it intends to continue to push the nomination through, even if it means putting the next president in the position of picking a replacement.
Trump has repeatedly criticized the courts, and the courts have become an especially sore point with him.
In a tweet last week, he accused them of being “the worst, most corrupt and dishonest organization in the history of the world.”
But on Thursday, Wynns’ nomination was cheered by Democrats.
“He has made the most important legal decisions of his life,” said Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ).
“He understands that justice is not a partisan issue.”
The president’s executive order was later challenged by Democrats, who argued that it violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause, which prohibits government from endorsing any political candidate.
The judges on Wynns panel have already voted to uphold Trump’s executive action, which is a victory for Trump.