Posted on 12/06/2019 4:39:41 PM PST by blueyon
Jay ByBee (Dubya judge - 74-19 vote in 2003)
Sandra Ikuta (Dubya judge - 81-0 vote in 2006). One of the few Federalist Society judges appointed by Bush.
John Byron Owens (ClownBammy judge - 56-43 vote in 2013)
Yes, that is something that needs to be addressed.
My understanding is that, with the last confirmation in the Senate, an en banc 9th Circuit hearing would be majority conservative.
I read that Judge Bybee graduated from Brigham Young so he is likely a Mormon. Brave of him to support Trump in the face of Mitty’s hostility.
Bybee is retiring at the end of the year so perhaps that gives him some courage.
Now we just have to wait for decisions from the 2nd and 4th circuits.
And Jay Bybee moving to senior status to be replaced by Lawrence Van Dyke, likely to be confirmed next week.
My understanding is that, with the last confirmation in the Senate, an en banc 9th Circuit hearing would be majority conservative.
*************************************
No, it’s still 16-13 ‘RAT controlled...but we’re getting there. The 9 Clinton appointees on the court are ALL eligible to take Senior Status or retirement at 100% of salary whenever they want.
Not yet. They still have a majority 16-13 going by who appointed them. It's actually worse, with a couple of the GWB Judges voting against us frequently. The next two to retire will be GWB Judges. The Clinton Judges are holding on hoping for a Dem POTUS.
This is the eminent jurist that was recently attacked in the Senate.
The 9th Circuit is still aware we’d love to spilt their court up.
Never trust them even when they rule correctly. In fact, when they rule correctly, double check all the fine print in their ruling.
AIDS.
Except that Linda 2.0 reinstituted that custom.
Which begs the question...why would you let anybody with such a disease into the country.
Some lawyer hear explain why some injunctions affect nationwide but lifting this injunction does not
Please and thank you?
We couldn't discriminate that wouldn't be kind. </s>
Basically we need two new constitutional amendments. The first has to throw out all the existing federal judges (the 1/3 most senior immediately upon ratification of the amendment), the next most 1/3 senior two years later, and the rest four years later. Some continuity is needed so replacement judges can learn their jobs from existing one.
IMO that is the only way to break this problem of partisan Democrat judges. It will also terrorize their replacements into behaving themselves.
The second amendment must impose term limits on federal judges. Even Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsberg favors that AFAIK. I think she favors a twenty year limit. IMO the limit should be on total service on the federal bench in any capacity rather than 20 years as a District Court judge, then another 20 as a Circuit Court Judge, and finally 20 years as a Supreme Court Justice. I'd make it a flat 16 years total, in any capacity.
Included in the second amendment should be creation of some judge-run system short of impeachment to remove senile, corrupt and misbehaving federal judges. Every state has that and the federal bench needs one too. I doubt there'd be significant opposition to this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.