Dems begin to panic as Trump set to transform federal judiciary

The American Thinker ^ | 06/23/17 | Thomas Lifson

[pgkdan]

While Democrats obsess over the Russia hacking fantasy and Robert Mueller as Trump's Javert, President Trump, the Federalist Society, and Senator Chuck Grassley are on the way to making the federal judiciary great again. The Huffington Post noticed and is worried:

Trump is unbelievably well positioned to fill up federal courts with lifetime judges. He inherited a whopping 108 court vacancies when he became president – double the number of vacancies President Barack Obama inherited when he took office.

The reason Trump gets to fill so many seats is partly because Obama was slow to fill court vacancies early in his tenure. But the main reason is Republicans' years­long strategy of denying votes to Obama's court picks. They refused to recommend judicial nominees, filibustered others, used procedural rules to drag out the confirmation process and, by Obama's final year, blocked nominees they had recommended just to prevent him from filling more seats.

Yep: Sometimes the Stupid Party actually does its job.

Elections have consequences, and when voters handed control of the Senate to the GOP, Senator Grassley – the very opposite of a showboater – did his job as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee with skill. Now he is poised to capitalize on that control, using the Dems' "Reid Rule" that abolished the filibuster for judicial nominations, and will supplement it with another reform that will prevent Dems from obstructing appointments to the Circuit Courts of Appeals:

Snip...

[Red Badger]

Stupid rule, is simply an archaic formality, it has no practical value, like the Doorman at the House of Commons slamming the door in the face of the King or Queen..............

[for-q-clinton]

Get rid of blue slips and make the 9th circus the most conservative court in the nation. That may help fix the nuts out west too.

[Moonman62]

Thanks for posting this great news. More and more winning.

[Freemeorkillme]

Anybody know how many fed justices have been appointed so far?

I know he’s been quietly nominating in batches, but don’t have a tally on the total to date.

[GOPJ]

Once leftists discovered they could make up stuff like the "penumbra" of the Constitution and that judges could pretend their policy choices were required by law, despite no direct wording to that effect, the door was open to impose the Progressive Agenda without all the messiness of approving legislation in Congress, where the people have a voice. That undemocratic – indeed, anti-democratic – approach to governing, wherein the elite discusses theories in academic journals, and then activist judges impose those theories as law, is popular among the cultural elite, because they believe themselves to be something like philosopher-kings, entitled to rule others by their superior wisdom.

Trump needs to get these positions filled - before liberals can do more damage.

[Rusty0604]

Senate rules are causing a lot of problems.

[COBOL2Java]

Wait a minute! How can this be? Debbie Wasserman Schultz told us that "Donald Trump Has Accomplished Nothing Of Significance, Thankfully, Because Of Nancy Pelosi".

[Vendome]

Bingo.

S What I’ve been saying since last year.

We win.

We get 4 swings at SCOTUS

More than 600 at Federal Judges.....

8 years

[tired&retired]

Next, fire all the Obama Federal Prosecutors and appoint new ones.

Fire all the Inspector Generals and appoint new ones. (Obama kept a lot of temp IG’s) State dept had no IG the entire time Hillary was there.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

>>Scalia was a once-in-lifetime true-blue conservative.

You’re overlooking Clarence and Sam!

[pgkdan]

Senate rules are causing a lot of problems.

More like Yertle McConnel's blind devotion to those archaic rules.

[chesley]

since Trump took office, EVERY day has been CHRISTMAS with a dollop of Fourth of July!!

[DoughtyOne]

My proposal has been this.

Divide the 9th, and require judges to be cut in half as well. Send half the 9th judges to the new court. Then make appointments to fill the roster, giving us a roughly 50/50 judiciary in each court.

You suggest three rings. What a great additional dynamic. Do what I suggested, move justices to each court, leaving 2/3rds of the needed justice seats empty in each. Then you fill that 2/3rds with new justices.

Yikes! What a flip.

Folks could respond by pointing out we couldn’t force judges to move out of the area to the new court’s districts. Easy fix...

Leave all three court seats in the same city they are in now. No legal teams or defendants would have to travel any farther than they had previously, so this would be no additional burden.

Then you have three courts that are cleaned up, instead of one that is sick and twisted.

[Lionheartusa1]

I love the smell of Democrat panic in the morning ,,, I suppose we should all get used to it for years to come as they double down on their insanity .

[House Atreides]

Yes, Grassley needs to eliminate the “blue slip” process for Circuit Court nominees. But he ALSO NEEDS TO ELIMINATE THE “BLUE SLIP” PROCESS FOR DISTRICT COURT NOMINEES.

It is the District Court Judges who initiate the usurpation of Trump's clear responsibilities. The DISTRICT COURTS ARE THE FOUNDATION OF THE PYRAMID. Let's take a long view and appoint constitutionalist conservatives at all level of the judiciary,

[C210N]

Divide the 9th, and require judges to be cut in half as well. Send half the 9th judges to the....

I suggest after cutting each judge, to toss the left side and just use the right.

[HamiltonJay]

It is imperative that the GOP is working hard for 18, because if dems get a majority in the house, they will slam close the window... I think the odds of the D’s retaking the house are low, but can’t sit on our laurels... Need to be even more engaged than 16 IMHO....

Because I guarantee the D’s will be motivated as all get out.

[DoughtyOne]

You could use the top or bottom half, but I’m not sure they can cut them down the middle.

[C210N]

In the vein of taking the high road, toss the lower bottom halves then.

[MattinNJ]

The Appellate level is as important, if not more important, than SCOTUS. Most cases settle because the client has to have deep, deep pockets to get through a trial, let alone an appeal. From there, it is a quantum leap to get to SCOTUS. Most binding law is from the Appellate courts.