Trump to inherit more than 100 court vacancies, plans to reshape judiciary

[still_one]

"Donald Trump is set to inherit an uncommon number of vacancies in the federal courts in addition to the open Supreme Court seat, giving the president-elect a monumental opportunity to reshape the judiciary after taking office.

The estimated 103 judicial vacancies that President Obama is expected to hand over to Trump in the Jan. 20 transition of power is nearly double the 54 openings Obama found eight years ago following George W. Bush’s presidency.

Confirmation of Obama’s judicial nominees slowed to a crawl after Republicans took control of the Senate in 2015. Obama White House officials blame Senate Republicans for what they characterize as an unprecedented level of obstruction in blocking the Democratic president’s court picks."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-to-inherit-more-than-100-court-vacancies-plans-to-reshape-judiciary/2016/12/25/d190dd18-c928-11e6-85b5-76616a33048d_story.html?utm_term=.5483ec7c5458

[Historic NY]

1. Elections have consequences............

life as you thought was bad under Obama is about to be completely upended. Wait until the expand the Gitmo Prison to off mainland criminals. Thank you voters, the ones that thought their protest vote against Hillary over Sanders was ok.

[still_one]

4. This was a generational event, and what many failed to grasp is that, unless something unforseen

occurs, it will take decades to undo the damage that will be done in the next four years.

[mopinko]

2. damn do i hope he finds a way to push garrett through.

that was his seat to fill. our seat to fill.
if there was a shred of fairness to be found in the whole damn thug party, they would give it to him. they will get their chance.
assholes.

[MoonRiver]

3. You do know that's not gong to happen, correct?

Obama has NO way of pushing that through before the orange anus is installed.

[mopinko]

5. i assume not.

i know there was a loophole discussed around here a while back, but it didnt seem like a very sturdy hole to me.

as useless as wishing for fairness from thugs. i know. i know.

[MoonRiver]

7. It's all pretty sad and horrific.

I am starting to accept that I live in a banana republic, until further notice.

[mopinko]

8. down the rabbit hole, we are.

without a doubt. gonna be a long 4 years.

[MoonRiver]

9. I hope it is ONLY 4!

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

10. It won't be if Democrats don't stop attacking rust belt voters

Dems CANNOT and WILL NOT win without taking back the rust belt states.

[Historic NY]

12. Really, there are plenty of other voters out there that just sit home...

and election decided on 100k voters is an election. Where was the rust belt in 2000 and 2004 that gave us Bush????

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

15. People who sit home and don't vote are not voters, they are observers at the most...

It's far easier to reach people who actually vote, especially when they used to vote for Democrats. These voters were LOST because the Democratic Party has the bad habit of preferring to listen to themselves over listening to the voters.

[DonCoquixote]

27. there may be some truth to that

But there is also truth to that while not all of them were bigots, many were, and those that were not were willing to empower the bigots. It is one thing to want attention paid to them, to regrow jobs, it is another when some want the days when they were the ones that gt the first and best bite of everything, others be damned.

[Amishman]

25. It will be hard, Trump and company will be working hard to direct funding and jobs to those states

He will do what he can to bribe those voters using everyone else's money

[still_one]

21. That is why russ feingold, zypher teachout, and every establishment incumbent republican won the

Senate races in those critical swing states

Uh, no

The fact that significant number of self-identifed progressives refused to vote not just for hillary but forgot about the Senate just might have had an effect, and a good number of those swing state Democrats were not only progressive, but campaigned on the issues Bernie spoke of. only confirms not only that your assessment is wrong, but those self-identified Democrats who wanted to teach a lesson to everyone by not voting, just screwed everyone for at least a generation

[mopinko]

11. yeah, not even gonna go THERE.

sheesh. if he gets re-elected it WILL be time for me to move back to the old sod, where i have more rights than i do here now.
farms going for peanuts over there, too.

[libtodeath]

13. They had the theft of the election set up all the way back then.

[mopinko]

14. no doubt.

could have just been their usual hubris, but they dont tend to over play their hands. they always have an ace in their back pockets.

[MFM008]

6. If democrats

Don't block his shit to the best of their abilities
We don't deserve to be in Congress at all.

[kudzu22]

16. Sadly, there will be no blocking

thanks to Harry Reid's short-sighted move to invoke the so-called "nuclear option" and eliminate the filibuster for presidential nominees. I love him but man, what a dumb move that was.

[SaschaHM]

17. He can't win.

People were crying and screaming about Democrats being weak for not getting rid of the filibuster. Hell, Even Bernie and Elizabeth Warren voted to get rid of it on non-Scotus nominees. The only ones that didn't were the Republicans, Pryor, Levin, and Manchin.

[JudyM]

18. Many don't deserve to be in congress, IMO. Which is part of the reason we are where we are today.

We have been too quick to roll over rather than taking the oh-so-horrible path of partisan maneuvering.

[Crunchy Frog]

20. If the American people don't see the Dems seriously fighting back, I'm afraid

that more and more of them are going to think that there's no point in supporting or voting for them. I seriously worry about losing the support of the electorate that's normally aligned with Dem values.

[Crunchy Frog]

19. That's one of the most fucking terrifying things about this whole mess.

This scares me more than his nuke talk. This won't be America anymore after he gets through with it.

[still_one]

24. They actually both concern me, but that is what made this election a generational event. Losing the

Presidency was bad, but also losing the Senate is a complete disaster that will take a decades to recover from the damage that will be done

[andym]

22. The GOP is playing to win by any means possible. nt.

[Orsino]

23. And Congressional majorities suddenly eager to fill those seats. n/t

[Uponthegears]

26. And, barring yet another S.Ct vacancy, how is he going to "reshape the judiciary?"

Except for one sliver of constitutional law applicable in criminal cases, Justice Scalia was as far to the right as you can get. Regardless of who he appoints to fill the Scalia vacancy, the balance in the Supreme Court will not change.

Of those 102 remaining vacancies, only 13 are on the Circuit Courts of Appeals (where federal law is primarily made/interpreted) and none of those vacancies will change the balance of the en banc court in any circuit. The fact of the matter is that, while many are bemoaning the fact that Harry Reid eliminated the filibuster for non-S.Ct. judicial nominees, Obama was able to leave a lasting legacy in the courts of appeals.

The remaining vacancies are in the district courts where any legal decision a Trump judge would make would be subject to de novo review in the courts of appeals and every factual decision a Trump judge would make would affect only the particular case before them. Now that sucks for the litigants in that case, but it doesn't "reshape" anything.

The tragedy of Trump is not that we face a rollback of Obama-era S.Ct. decisions, but that we lost a potentially once in a lifetime opportunity to reverse some really horrendous decisions. Citizens United was 5-4, with Scalia in the majority (in fact, even though Buckley v. Valeo - which gives a millionaire a million times more political free speech than a person with a dollar in his pocket - was not 5-4, many of the fractured concurring opinions which were cobbled together to get a majority decision were actually close to saying that money does not equal speech). Shelby County, the VRA decision, was 5-4 with Scalia in the majority. Heller, the 2nd Amendment case, was a 5-4 decision with Scalia in the majority. Hobby Lobby was a 5-4 decision with Scalia in the majority. We could have changed this country for a generation and we failed.

As sad as that is, however, it doesn't mean that Trump can reshape the federal courts.

[dionysus]

28. Good post

[Cha]

29. Kick :(