1 in every 4 circuit court judges is now a Tr

[+DieChecker]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/one-in-every-four-circuit-court-judges-is-now-a-trump-appointee/2019/12/21/d6fa1e98-2336-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

Quote

1 in every 4 circuit court judges is now a Trump appointee

 

Quote

Trump’s appointments have flipped three circuit courts to majority GOP-appointed judges, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in New York. The president has also selected younger conservatives for these lifetime appointments, ensuring his impact is felt for many years.

A Warren, or Sanders, presidency probably will get little radical change done due to these new judges.

Trump's been stopped I dont know how many times. Well, what is good for the goose....

[Space Commander Travis]

Oh, Trump appointee. The title cuts it off at "1 in 4 circuit judges is now a Tr". I was wondering, Transexual? That's social advance right there.

[toast]

Tr = Transylvanian

[Gromdor]

45 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/one-in-every-four-circuit-court-judges-is-now-a-trump-appointee/2019/12/21/d6fa1e98-2336-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

 

A Warren, or Sanders, presidency probably will get little radical change done due to these new judges.

Trump's been stopped I dont know how many times. Well, what is good for the goose....

Thinking he might have been stopped because what he was doing was, well, you know illegal.

[Wistman]

It's McConnell who blocked Obama's judicial appointees (including Garland to the Supreme Court) and pointedly pushed Trump's relentlessly.  It's pretty much all the Senate does these days.  It's been a long term project of the Right.  They are so close now to ultimate victory, with control of the courts.  Any lower court decision that is unfavorable to them will simply be appealed away.  The Koch brothers pretty much said so when Trump was elected.

[Gromdor]

1 minute ago, The Wistman said:

It's McConnell who blocked Obama's judicial appointees (including Garland to the Supreme Court) and pointedly pushed Trump's relentlessly.  It's pretty much all the Senate does these days.  It's been a long term project of the Right.  They are so close now to ultimate victory, with control of the courts.  Any lower court decision that is unfavorable to them will simply be appealed away.  The Koch brothers pretty much said so when Trump was elected.

It will work out great with the next Exxon oil spill or asbestos in baby powder case I imagine.

[+DieChecker]

42 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Thinking he might have been stopped because what he was doing was, well, you know illegal.

Or, at least is SPUN to be seen as illegal by the Left.

Constitutionally Trump has the right to end Executive Orders, but the courts have stopped him from doing so, based solely on liberal ideology, and liberal judges.

Now, I suspect we'll see some of that swing the other way.

[Gromdor]

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Or, at least is SPUN to be seen as illegal by the Left.

Constitutionally Trump has the right to end Executive Orders, but the courts have stopped him from doing so, based solely on liberal ideology, and liberal judges.

Now, I suspect we'll see some of that swing the other way.

I'm just basing my judgement of his understanding of the law on the history of how he handled his personal affairs/charities/foundation/university/organization.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

7 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

Oh, Trump appointee. The title cuts it off at "1 in 4 circuit judges is now a Tr". I was wondering, Transexual? That's social advance right there.

 

7 hours ago, toast said:

Tr = Transylvanian

A transsexual from Transylvania?

Sweet.

[Setton]

How pathetically sad that having a politically aligned judiciary is seen as a victory. 

Edited December 22, 2019 by Setton

[+and-then]

10 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

 

A transsexual from Transylvania?

Sweet.

As a special victim group that one HAS to be golden 

[+DieChecker]

On 12/22/2019 at 3:05 PM, Setton said:

How pathetically sad that having a politically aligned judiciary is seen as a victory. 

The shame is in that the Judiciary was ever allowed to not be impartial. 

Most of the judiciary probably is fine, and some of Trumps own appointees have sided against him. However there are like three courts... Hawaii, Southern California, and Southern New York... which we see the Left going to time after time, because of bias judges. And there are cheers every time something is blocked. We have cases from Colorado, or North Dakota, being tried in California, or Hawaii, because the liberals know they can get a Restraining order there.

So, yeah, I dont have a problem, since the Constitutional Rules allow it.

[Farmer77]

On 12/22/2019 at 7:05 PM, Setton said:

How pathetically sad that having a politically aligned judiciary is seen as a victory. 

Theyve deluded themselves into believing that anything that goes against one of them or their agenda is due to bias.

 

[Farmer77]

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

The shame is in that the Judiciary was ever allowed to not be impartial. 

Most of the judiciary probably is fine, and some of Trumps own appointees have sided against him. However there are like three courts... Hawaii, Southern California, and Southern New York... which we see the Left going to time after time, because of bias judges. And there are cheers every time something is blocked. We have cases from Colorado, or North Dakota, being tried in California, or Hawaii, because the liberals know they can get a Restraining order there.

So, yeah, I dont have a problem, since the Constitutional Rules allow it.

 Are you sure about the states you listed? I do know there are a couple that folks dont think of as being 9th circuit off the top of their heads

Quote

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in case citations, 9th Cir.) is a court of appeal that has appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

• District of Alaska
• District of Arizona
• Central District of California
• Eastern District of California
• Northern District of California
• Southern District of California
• District of Hawaii
• District of Idaho
• District of Montana
• District of Nevada
• District of Oregon
• Eastern District of Washington
• Western District of Washington

 

[+DieChecker]

13 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

 Are you sure about the states you listed? I do know there are a couple that folks dont think of as being 9th circuit off the top of their heads

 

Well, we can go look back at the landmark cases, but if I remember right one of the Border Wall lawsuits was filed in Hawaii.

I plead ignorance though, of knowing how cases are handed out amongst a Circuit Court. 

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

Well, we can go look back at the landmark cases, but if I remember right one of the Border Wall lawsuits was filed in Hawaii.

I plead ignorance though, of knowing how cases are handed out amongst a Circuit Court. 

I know border wall cases tend to show up in the 9th because of AZ and CA being in the 9th, Hawaii is weird though.

 .....I wonder if the time zone difference would lead to cases (that should be in the 9th anyways) being filed in HI?

[+DieChecker]

Actually thay was a Travel Ban case in Hawaii. But same point stands. Cases are filed where known liberal bias judges are found.

I'm not even saying it's wrong, but that turn about is fair play.

AND, as so often is said......... None of this would have happened without Clinton.

Hillary was the key to the start of a decade of conservative takeovers. The SCotUS and now the Federal Courts. And when Trump wins again, it's going to that much worse, but with Pelosi to blame this time.

[Farmer77]

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Actually thay was a Travel Ban case in Hawaii. But same point stands. Cases are filed where known liberal bias judges are found.

This is a classic case of confirmation bias. Look at who brought that case. It was the State of Hawaii so of course it is being heard in a federal court in Hawaii.

7 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I'm not even saying it's wrong, but that turn about is fair play.

AND, as so often is said......... None of this would have happened without Clinton.

Hillary was the key to the start of a decade of conservative takeovers. The SCotUS and now the Federal Courts. And when Trump wins again, it's going to that much worse, but with Pelosi to blame this time.

Yeah I just cant buy in anymore man. What youre describing above has been accepted as gospel since I was a young kid. The problem I have now is the same people telling us those tales back then are bold faced lying to us now as they reveal their disdain for the Constitution and representative democracy.

Maybe what youre describing is real and happening (as far as Clinton and the courts) without time and energy to research it though I just cant lend credibility to the same people who think POTUS siding with Putin over our intelligence agencies is A-OK. As is the Trumpian move to pack the courts simply looks more and more like part of the "plan" to instill a dictatorship in America. Especially considering the quality of some of these candidates. Trump has been nominating people who have never even tried a case as a lawyer !

 

[Farmer77]

This new judge is a champ for sure (spoiler alert he got confirmed)

A Crying Shame A Trump nominee’s reaction to being held accountable for his long record of discrimination should make us all weep.

 

Quote

On Wednesday, Lawrence VanDyke, Donald Trump’s nominee for a seat on the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, made news by crying at his confirmation hearing. He began weeping after he was confronted with a letter from the American Bar Association that had deemed him “Not Qualified,” a ranking based on 60 interviews with 43 lawyers, 16 judges, and one other person who had worked with him. In their dealings with VanDyke, these individuals found him to be “arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice including procedural rules.” When Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley asked him, sympathetically, about the ABA concerns over whether “VanDyke would be fair to persons who are gay, lesbian, or otherwise part of the LGBTQ community,” the nominee sobbed openly. Despite his years of anti-LGBTQ writings and advocacy, VanDyke was the one who felt persecuted. Did he believe, Hawley asked, that he would treat LGBTQ litigants unfairly? “I do not believe that,” VanDyke said. “It is a fundamental belief of mine that all people are created in the image of God,” he insisted. “They should all be treated with dignity and respect.”

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Farmer77