[3] In private practice, Bennett was a partner in a major Maryland law firm, where he specialized in white collar criminal defense.

[4][6][7] While maintaining an active trial docket in the District of Maryland, Bennett has increasingly been sitting by designation with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

In 1969, he received a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Pennsylvania, where he majored in Political Science with a study in the Russian language.

[3] During his tenure, Bennett defended several high-profile clients, including Democratic State Delegate Tony E. Fulton, who was acquitted in 2000 of federal fraud and conspiracy charges.

"[4] In addition to his active federal trial practice, Bennett was a leading figure in the Maryland Republican Party.

He has also served on the Board of Visitors of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law which has awarded him the prestigious Barbera Judicial Excellence Award in recognition of his exemplifying the highest standards of judicial excellence and extraordinary courage in the handling of complex and difficult cases.

Bennett's nomination received the strong, bipartisan support of Democratic Senators Paul S. Sarbanes and Barbara A. Mikulski, and was praised by prominent members of the Maryland legal community.

Additionally, Bennett has been frequently sitting by designation with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

[4] He has traveled extensively in Central and Eastern Europe participating in judicial exchange programs in Russia, Estonia, Bulgaria, Turkey, Ukraine and the Czech Republic.

Mayor and City of Baltimore v. Azar, 392 F. Supp 3d 602, Bennett issued preliminary and permanent injunctions halting the implementation of a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Rule that would prohibit physicians from referring patients for an abortion, even if that is the patient’s desire ( a so-called “gag rule”).

3d 699, a case that received nationwide attention addressing Baltimore’s six-month Aerial Investigation Research (“AIR”) program in light of United States v. Carpenter, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018), Bennett held that the warrantless operation of the AIR surveillance program did not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures.