In a rare move, 18 state attorneys general have come together to urge the Senate to reject the judicial nomination of Nancy Abudu. The attorneys general, all of whom are Republicans, have cited Abudu's history of activism as the reason for their opposition. Abudu, who currently serves as the deputy legal director for the Southern Poverty Law Center, has been nominated by President Joe Biden to serve on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. If confirmed, she would become the first Black woman to serve on that court. However, the attorneys general argue that Abudu's record as an activist makes her unsuitable for the role. In a letter to Senate leaders, they wrote that Abudu has spent her career advocating for a particular political agenda rather than impartially interpreting the law. The attorneys general also pointed to Abudu's involvement in several high-profile cases, including a lawsuit challenging Florida's voter ID law and a case involving the rights of transgender students. They argue that Abudu's positions in these cases demonstrate a bias that would make it difficult for her to be an impartial judge. Abudu has defended her record, saying that her work as an activist has been focused on promoting equal rights and justice for all. She has also pointed out that her experience as a litigator and her commitment to the rule of law make her well-suited for the role of judge. The debate over Abudu's nomination highlights the ongoing tension between activism and impartiality in the judiciary. While some argue that judges should be free to advocate for causes they believe in, others believe that judges should remain neutral and impartial in order to maintain the integrity of the judicial system. Ultimately, it will be up to the Senate to decide whether Abudu's record as an activist disqualifies her from serving as a judge. But regardless of the outcome, the debate over her nomination serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining a fair and impartial judiciary.