Trump’s new Judiciary will rule this country for the rest of most of our lives

The three circuit courts that have flipped to Republican majorities this year have the potential to not only change policy but also benefit Trump professionally and politically. The 2nd Circuit, with its new right-leaning majority, will decide whether to rehear a case challenging Trump’s ability to block critics on Twitter, as well as one regarding Trump’s businesses profiting while he’s in office. The 11th Circuit, which handles appeals from Georgia, Florida and Alabama, is set to take up several voting rights cases. Trump has facetiously thanked Obama for leaving him so many judicial vacancies. “Now, President Obama was very nice to us. He gave us 142 empty positions. That’s never happened before,” Trump said in the Oval Office on Thursday. “But, as you know, that’s said to be the most important thing that a President has.”

There is only one circuit court vacancy left for Trump to fill, but more could open up next year. And if Trump wins in November, there will certainly be vacancies in his second term. There’s also the potential for additional openings on the Supreme Court. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, is 86 and has had health problems. Justice Stephen G. Breyer, another Clinton pick, is also over 80. Chris Kang, chief counsel of Demand Justice, a group that supports liberal judicial nominees, wants Democrats to recognize just how high the stakes are for 2020. “Republicans have been using the courts to achieve policy priorities that they couldn’t achieve through the democratically elected legislative branch of government,” Kang said. “These federal judges serve for life; that’s a point we take for granted, but not a way a lot of Americans understand it. Trump’s imprint on this country will be felt for decades through his courts.”

And they are not qualified according to the American Bar Association.

R3, and it doesn’t mean a thing because they are on the bench anyway

Liberals and Democrats keep crying about ABA accreditation and such as if we have power to make that stuff matter anymore. We need to realize we are out of power and the things that mattered to us have no sway in a Trump world.

That why you don’t lose elections

The job was actually to turn out for the 2014 midterms. Too many GOP senators were elected that year. It was too late by 2016.

We actually first stopped the ball in 2010, a pivotal election of the century that would determine gerrymandering and jumpstart the nascent Tea Party electrons. Liberals foolishly believed Obama would change everything for good and new demographics endured a progressive future. We were dumb and negligent

Dont bet on it OP....many are unqualified...and several have a negative ABA rating. You can bet that at some point the Democrats will reevaluate them and either offer them an opportunity to resign or face impeachment themselves. Yes, we will be forced to keep about 50 % of them, but they will be staunch conservatives, but qualified with good reputations. The others were obviously appointed for easy manipulation and favors. Because the glaring fact they are unqualified was featured in the media, it will make it easier to accomplish.

R9, you’re delusional. They are on the bench for life

We're fucked.

I am glad I'm only on earth for 20 years or so more, and hope I can escape to a safe place if Trump's America starts expanding their emulation of the Third Reich.

Yeah, there is a good chance that through precedent, Trump’s judges will rule this nation into the next century

Polyanna Democrats like to wish away the consequences of 2016 with wild pipe dreams about how the harm will be undone in the future. What they fail to realize is that Trump and judiciary are Laying the foundation to undermine elections to keep the Democratic base suppressed and out of power permanently. Through court decisions, they will kill efforts to challenge Republican shenanigans. The watchdogs are on their side now

Fucked for the most part. There are still some constitutional laws that will need to be adhered to. Anyone who does the dumbest ruling, Ala the judge who gave the lenient sentence to rapist Brock Turner will still be checked. They can be removed via impeachment.

B-but we impeached him... ?!

Good, they'll follow the constitution and not legislate from the bench as the progs do. Looks like you'll not get to go crying to the courts to overturn legal constitutional bills that the majority voted for.

R16, this is not a place for you. Go to the Klan board

A lot of the blaim is actually with Obama. He is the one who left so many of the seats open.

R18, don’t be dumb. Repubs blocked his appointments. Read and educate yourself dude

[quote]blaim

WTF

No, impeachment of judges requires 67 votes to remove. These judges are here to stay. As for Brock Turner, that was a STATE judge, most of whom are subject to election every 4 to 6 years, not lifetime Federal appointments. As to Obama, he couldn't fill appointments once McConnell took over the Senate after the 2014 midterms. And no, 2016 was perfect to take the Senate back, but Hillary sucked and turnout dropped so we were fucked.

[quote]overturn legal constitutional bills that the majority voted for.

What "majority," you train wreck? The MAJORITY didn't vote for Trump.

And this is why Susan Sarandon is an absolutely selfish, unthinking CUNT.

And the Best overdramatic poster award goes to R11

I've known some unqualified federal judges who were appointed for political reasons and they drank themselves into early graves. So "lifetime appointment" doesn't always mean "forever".

R22 I am not talking about the presidential election cunt-lick, I am talking about state referendums that the majority of voters voted for---can you think of a few??

Liberals and Democrats are suffering the effects of a mixture of arrogant overconfidence, purity tests and cancel culture, naïvety, political laziness, and just plain political ignorance. We like to think of conservatives as dumb, but at least they prioritize seizing power and remaking the judiciary.

Eight judges

Four Republican

Four Democratic

Voted on by the people.

Problem solved.

R25, you seem to have a hard time dealing with reality

I know an acquaintance Lawyer who rode GOP coattails to work at the Dept of Justice for two years and suddenly got nominated and was granted a lifetime judgeship after that.

I was like WTF???

[quote][R22] I am not talking about the presidential election cunt-lick, I am talking about state referendums that the majority of voters voted for---can you think of a few??

No one wants Trump licking their cunt unless they're getting paid, fucking asshole who doesn't use a comma. And you truly are trainwreck.

You're on a fucking GAY BOARD being gleeful over the prospects of REPUBLICAN APPOINTEES -some of whom are known homophobes- deciding people's fate?

IDIOT.

We didn't 'fail'. The Republicans can't win without tricks (hacking, propaganda, brainwashing, voter suppression, smear campaigns...). They pulled every trick in the book and squeaked by... and "won".

R31 There is so much more to the US and the world than seeing everything through an LGBT lens you histrionic igmoid. By the way, love your hyper-excitable use of "Republican appointees" as a dog whistle. Sad you think that Judges can legislate from the bench but all of that is going away and it is back to strictly following the constitution for a change. Trump's appointment of constitutional judges did this to R31 --->

if you want to be angry at someone, be angry at RBG. She should have retired while Obama could replace her.

Democrats need to take back the WH and Congress. Then, expand the SCOTUS a few sane young liberal judges.

Regarding RBG, who's to say that McTurtle wouldn't have held up any replacement for her as well.

This is maddening and I am truly scared after reading all this. There's got to be a way to fix this.

R33, you're an idiot and saying there's "more to it" as if we're talking about disputing a parking ticket, shows how low you'll sink. You're fine with people's rights being taken away based on the bigotry of the person sitting in judgment of them.

Yeah, there is "more to it." Usually, a homophobe doesn't limit their prejudice to only gay people.

WTF are you even on here normalizing unqualified appointees? Are you a troll. I mean it's obvious you're an asshole, regardless.

the last POTUS who tried to pack the court didn't work out so well

R33, this is not a place for you. You are a pariah

The last POTUS who tried to pack the court didn’t succeed at that task, but he was elected four times.

This is why elections are important. Federal and supreme judges can affect our lives for generations. Trump is placing extreme right wing judges that will make decisions on ideology rather than precedence or law.

Lotsa them didn't go out to vote in 2014 and 2016, being busy playing Pokemon, but they had audacity to come out in droves to protest in 2017. Deplorable. And thank you Sue Sarandon and Jill Stein for making all this shit possible one way or another.

Yes, anyone who didn't vote for Hillary gave up any right to complain about Trump. Thanks for helping him get elected, jackasses.

elections have consequences, to those who didn't vote in 2016 out of spite, you get what you deserve

R40: He also got the court sufficiently afraid of being changed and/or challenged that the existing judges started finding New Deal legislation constitutional. Courts scholars call it the "Switch in Time that Saved Nine" And then the retirements started and then that President had named all 9 justices by the time of his death. History is fun.

Judges, judges, judges. It's not the actual White House.

It's everything.

God, I hate Trump.

I hate so=called liberals and moderates too arrogant that they couldn't see the forest for the trees.

To stupidly think Trump and Clinton were the same that you didn't think about the people *actually* surrounding Trump and making the decisions were extremists.

Idiots.

so-called*

"Judges, judges, judges... God, I hate Trump"

I imagine it's Pence doing the hiring. Choosing all his Christian Supremacist buds.

“The 5th Circuit today is a sneak peek of what more courts will look like once they have been fully captured by judges both Trump-appointed and Trump-aligned.”

Please read. This is terrifying.

If it gets so one sided in the courts that justice can't prevail, then people will revolt. It won't matter how much power the Reich has when their heads are on a spike or chopped off by guillotines. Too bad they are so against gun control, it will be their undoing. Mark my words.

It should not be surprising that this court cut back on protections against double jeopardy, permitting prosecutors to retry a defendant on an issue of fact that a jury has already decided in his favor. Or that the court curbed Americans’ right to protest in a decision involving DeRay Mckesson, a Black Lives Matter activist. During one demonstration that Mckesson helped lead against police brutality, a protester threw a hard object at an officer that hit him. The officer then sued Mckesson, even though he’d done nothing to incite violence. In shocking ruling, the 5th Circuit approved the lawsuit, holding Mckesson was liable for any violence committed by any protester at his demonstration. This decision is a frontal attack on the First Amendment, subjecting activists to crippling damages by making them liable for the conduct of people they can’t actually control. It radically alters free speech law, suppressing dissent and threatening to bankrupt civil rights groups.

The 5th Circuit is also finding new and creative ways to trample LGBTQ rights. The court held that the Eighth Amendment does not require prisons to provide sex reassignment surgery to transgender inmates, even those who threaten suicide. Ho’s opinion for the court willfully misgendered the trans plaintiff. The court also held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. In a long-winded concurrence to his own majority opinion, Ho then lobbied SCOTUS to rule against LGBTQ equality, writing that a decision for LGBTQ rights would delegitimize the court.

Bump

Those examples aren't helping your argument, R52.

I was just talking to a group of friends about this. We came to The conclusion that it’s hopeless because liberals are so politically lazy and asleep. Conservatives are always in fight and conquer Mode.

[quote]If it gets so one sided in the courts that justice can't prevail, then people will revolt.

Your assumption that the rulings would be opposed by the majority of Americans is probably incorrect. There may be a revolt, but it would likely be by a minority of the population. For example, I'm inclined to believe that most people would agree that the Constitution does not require that the federal government pay for gender reassignment surgery for federal prison inmates.

Democrats and progressive tick me off being so weak

[quote] For example, I'm inclined to believe that most people would agree that the Constitution does not require that the federal government pay for gender reassignment surgery for federal prison inmates.

I'm trying to picture the founders grappling with this notion. As scientists, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would probably be intrigued by such a medical procedure becoming possible -- but I fear that many of them might be unable even to imagine it (much less approve). I don't know enough about those men's personalities, but at least one would probably snicker derisively.

The problem isn't just 2016. Democrats get complacent at the mid-terms when there is a Democrat in the White House. If we had not lost the Senate in 2014 all of those seats would have been filled by Obama, and Merrick Garland would be sitting on the Supreme Court - or someone more liberal, since Garland was a compromise nomination.

Vote by mail needs to spread across the country. We have it in Colorado - I get an email when my ballot is on the way to me, I can mail it back, or drop it in the drop box outside the library two blocks away. I get an email when my ballot is received, and another when it is counted. Making it easier to vote increases participation.

Higher turn-out is always good for the Democrats - that's why the Repugs are against it.

We need to get our shit together and remember that EVERY election is important - not just the Presidential election, and not just the mid-terms when the GOP holds the White House.

Yes, R59. Voting is mandatory in Australia, isn't it? I remember someone from that country posting on DL that the system works there.

Yes, I believe it is compulsory in Australia. I don't know that that would fly here, but election day should be a National Holiday, or on a weekend. Another benefit of vote by mail, is that for the most part, they don't know what your race is.

Minorities experience voter suppression in much greater percentages than white people. Precincts in "urban" neighborhoods are more prone to long lines, power issues, and sudden changes in polling places on election day.

Republicans vote.

Democrats like the tenacious commitment to gaining and keeping power that conservatives instinctually have. Liberals lack fear of losing power or being subjugated that conservatives harness to political advantage.

I read that Clarence Thomas is planning to retire if Trump gets re-elected. So that’s another potential Supreme Court appointment.

Democrats are still too chill and lackadaisical about politics. Why aren’t we storming Capital Hill and shouting down Republicans Wherever they go en masse? Why are we so low energy?

They also cheat. They can't actually win if votes counted and gerrymandering didn't exist.

R64 what a dumbass.

You are swiftly approaching fascism.

And we are too lazy to protest it

In the 60s, movements were able to stage multiple massive protests without social media and technology. Now, people whine but do nothing tangible to make a difference.

The majority of this country votes for Dems and pays most of the bills for this country. If they try to take away rights based on targeting a single sexuality or a single gender or a single religion, there will absolutely be war.

Do people honestly think that they could just take away the right to choose in NYC and LA- two cities with a combined population greater than several red states combined? Good luck getting either city to send tax money to bumfuck if they take away the rights of the citizens who pay for red state moochers who on top of having their leech hands out, want to tell their benefactors what they can and can't do.

[quote]Precincts in "urban" neighborhoods are more prone to long lines, power issues, and sudden changes in polling places on election day.

You know that those are controlled by the local supervisor of elections, right?

Nina Turner voted for Jill Stein in '16, and she's damn proud of it!

You see, one is judged by the company one keeps.

R72, STFU.

Whoever upthread said 2020 will be all about turnout is dead right. If turnout is high, we will have a Democratic president-elect in 2020. It's one reason I continue to warm to Bernie. Although I find the man personally grating at times, polling suggests no other better candidate is in a better position to drive turnout from low-interest and first-time voters. Those who've felt left out by the political process and have disengaged. Those who would, overwhelmingly, support the Democratic nominee.

Trump had nothing to do with it. Pence has been hard at work on this.

And this (and the tax cuts) are the reasons he'll continue to have the support of 99.9% of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters in 2020. Nothing he says or does -- racist, xenophobic, homphobic, downright insane -- will stop them from supporting him because he's probably done more than any President in modern history to solidify their regressive, ultra-conservative viewpoint.

In regard to abortion rights and gay marriage rights, the very worst scenario (and it IS a terrible scenario), is that those rights would revert to states, rather than being federal rights. But that would be a bitter blow and would possibly ignite a complete gender divide in red states, with women deserting the Republican party completely. One would hope that that the Supreme court would uphold past decisions......but given the ideological bent of the newer judges, that is by no means certain.

[quote]Trump had nothing to do with it. Pence has been hard at work on this.

Trump... SI G N E D off on ALL OF IT. EVERY NAME.

So when you say he had "nothing" to do with it, you better not be disgustingly trying to defend Trump in some warped way like he hasn't shown he is scum for numerous other reasons.

It's all about abortion and nothing else. These motherfuckers don't care about anything else, not do they care about the country. It's about abortion and abortion only.

It's true that Dems are too lazy - take CNN. No matter how important any subject matter is, you can be sure they are not going to make their big name commentators come in to work the news desk. You can be certain, however, that Hannity will will appear "live" and be right in your face.

As far as lifetime judicial appointments go, we live in interesting times. No other U.S. President has broken so many laws and corrupted the Constitution as much as Dump has. The only reason why he is still president is because our stupid laws prevent criminal charges be brought against a sitting president. How idiotic is that? Plus, there's the questionable means as to how he even got elected in the first place!

I trust that if Dems gain both Houses and the Presidency, they will return the favor to these criminal Repukes. I can only hope that their comeuppance be a slow and painful one ending with felony convictions. That's right, these rat fuckers are going to J-A-I-L! Why...can you imagine what a Dem Attorney General can do once Bill Barr is gone? The breath and debt of these investigations will be mind boggling. The paper trail would go on and on and on, lasting years if not a decade to unveil.

Democrats are too weak

Democrats try to follow the rules, R82 -- always a disadvantage.

11/21/2013 : Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) warned Democrats Thursday that they’d regret using the “nuclear option.” “You’ll regret this, and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” McConnell said on the Senate floor. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Thursday started the process of invoking the nuclear option, saying he wanted to change Senate rules to prevent the minority from filibustering any nominations other than those to the Supreme Court.

No one can say that they weren’t warned.

OP is absolutely right.

Hey asshole. R34, Supreme Court judges don't resign, they retire. And even if she had, Obama would have replaced her with another liberal and we wouldn't be any further ahead with liberals on the bench. Can you do simple math?

True, but it’s also true that Trump has a good chance of replacing Ginsburg with a Hardline rightwinger next year, or in his second term.

He's always had that chance, it was handed to him by McConnell. Its neither the fault of Obama or Ginsburg.

*It's

I'm not R34, but R85 if you knew how to read you would see R34 wrote "retired."

So what, R89? Can you read this, C-U-N-T?

Deal with your anger issues R90.

R91, go fuck yourself, C-U-N-T.

It’s the Democratic and progressive base’s fault for not prioritizing the judiciary the say conservatives have for decades. Liberals are still shockingly unbothered by it.

We only care about trans women of color and child molesters getting the right to vote in prison.

Oh, that's SO funny and trenchant, R94, you cunt.

WTF is R94 even talking about? What a dumb post when the Republicans want their molesters in the Senate.

R84 is right - it was Harry Reid, when the Democrats had the majority in the Senate, who changed the long-standing rules that used to block this sort of thing.

I remember arguing with a good friend of mine about what a bad idea this was, and he was just like “it doesn’t matter we can get things done now”. I told him that this would be a big mistake in the long run and I’m sorry to say that I was right.

Don’t be so quick to declare yourself right, r97. The Republicans still may have changed the rules, but Harry Reid would not have been able to appoint any of Obama‘a nominees.

Trump has been able to appoint more judges in three years than President Obama did in eight. If the appointments continue at the same pace and Trump wins reelection, he will irrevocably change the federal judiciary for the next 30 years.

Harry “I work for the Vegas mob“ Reid made a big mistake.

R97, the Republicans would have definitely changed the rules as it did so without second though when it came to approving a SCOTUS judge.

This--and everything to do with Trump--is an ongoing tragedy. And nothing stops it. Not impeachment, not anything. It's happening every single day until the 2020 election. And then--I can't think about it.

[quote] Harry “I work for the Vegas mob“ Reid made a big mistake.

As if Harry Reid caused any of this.

With McConnell creating a rule out of thin air to deny Obama from naming a SCOTUS judge and then recently saying that rule didn't matter any more, the GOP would have created a new rule about judges once it knew it had the votes.

All we can hope for is Dems to win the White House and Senate and do exactly what the GOP has been.

No more of this, "Now we can return to the regular way things are done" bull shit.

The rationalization for what Reid did shows that no lesson was learned from that and the Democrats will again set a precedence that they will come to regret.

Reid changed the rules because Republicans we’re blocking Obama’s judges.

Reid changed the rules because Republicans we’re blocking Obama’s judges.

R104: Shut up trollboy.

Idiot R104, you mean precedent, not precedence.

I know, but there’s no edit option.

You still could have clarified it in a future post, but you didn't, dummy R109.

I trusted that someone else would bother.

Bullshit. You had no clue.

I suspect half will be found to be child molesters or soliciting bribes or hopeless alcoholics or drug addicts. Let the impeachments begin 2021.

Not gonna happen