You must vote DEMOCRAT🐴 🔵 for ONE single reason; The GOP make WHITE ONLY COURTS 👨🏼‍⚖️ for 40+ YEARS

℃ertifed

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
277,107
Reputation
-33,767
Daps
584,414
Reppin
The Deep State


Trump is out here nominating COMPLETELY unqualified people in their 30s and 40s to serve on federal courts!!!!!!!!

MANY OF WHOM HAVE NEVER TRIED CASES!!!!!!! OR WRITTEN BRIEFS!!!!!




















Sign In | Bloomberg Law

90

Jonathan Kobes is one of six Trump judiciary nominees to receive a "not qualified' rating from the American Bar Association. He was confirmed to the appeals bench.
Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Trump Picks More ‘Not Qualified’ Judges (1)
Dec. 17, 2018, 4:33 AM ; Updated: Dec. 19, 2018, 1:11 PM


  • Six judicial nominees rated “not qualified” in two years
  • Past four presidents had only four total in same time frame


More of Donald Trump’s judicial picks have received “not qualified” ratings from the American Bar Association than did those nominated by his four most-recent predecessors in the first two years of their presidencies, Bloomberg Law research shows.

download


The ABA has given that rating to six of Trump’s nominees, while four judges total nominated to lifetime positions by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush in their first two White House years received the lowest rating. None of George H.W. Bush or Barack Obama’s appointees over the same period fell into that category.

The appointments by past presidents were to trial, or district, courts, and all four were confirmed. In contrast, two of Trump’s “not qualified” nominees were to federal appeals courts. Appellate circuits are the highest courts that federal cases generally reach.

download


Both of Trump’s “not qualified"-rated nominees were confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, including Jonathan Kobes, whose standing generated the most recent controversy when his confirmation Dec. 11 required a tie-breaking vote by Vice President Mike Pence.

Kobes had “neither the requisite experience nor evidence of his ability to fulfill the scholarly writing required” of a federal appellate judge, according to the ABA committee responsible for rating nominees.

A Partisan Cast
Judicial ratings have been in the spotlight during the record-setting push by Trump and Senate Republicans to reshape the federal courts with conservative appointments. Democrats have forcefully objected to lower-rated nominees and others with shortcomings they deem unworthy for the judiciary.

To “have nominees that are not judged qualified by the bar association is deeply disturbing,” Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said previously.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has repeatedly said confirming Trump judges is a priority of the Republican-led Senate, and the GOP has forged ahead.

The Senate has confirmed 30 of Trump’s appellate nominees, two U.S. Supreme Court justices, and 53 district court judges. Senate leaders from both parties were said to be negotiating possibly moving a new slate of district court judges. A vote could come as early as Wednesday night.

The ABA ratings process became part of Brett Kavanaugh’s bitter Supreme Court confirmation battle this past fall. He’s now the newest justice.

The ABA gave him its highest rating, but indicated it would reevaluate it after his fiery confirmation hearing testimony took a decidedly partisan turn. It dropped the reevaluation as moot after Kavanaugh was confirmed.

Bias Alleged
The ABA ratings are purportedly non-partisan, but conservatives have been claiming that the ratings process is biased against them since the 1980s.

“No one who looks seriously at instances of the ABA’s negative assessments of conservative candidates—especially on the malleable topic of judicial temperament—can dispute that the ABA’s liberal bias sometimes comes into play,” Ed Whelan of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, who has been vocal in supporting Trump’s judicial nominees, told Bloomberg Law by email.

“How often and how intensely that happens depends largely on the composition of the ABA committee from year to year,” Whelan, who often contributes to the conservative National Review, said.

Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston who also writes for National Review, suggested the ABA has gotten it wrong more than once.

“The ABA has given unqualified ratings to people who went on to become prominent jurists, including” Judges Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook, Blackman said.

Posner and Easterbrook received “Qualified/Not Qualified” ratings, with the majority of the ratings committee rating them as qualified. Still, their ratings have often been described as low.

ABA President Hilarie Bass defended the ratings process as non-partisan last year, noting that nearly all of Trump’s picks had been rated “qualified” or “well qualified.”

No Pre-Clearance
Ratings are conducted by the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, an independent arm of the ABA. They’re advisory and have been used for decades.

Trump’s relatively large number of low-rated nominees is likely at least in part due to his decision not to participate in the ABA’s process for pre-clearing candidates.

Every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has participated except for Trump and George W. Bush, ABA spokesperson Matt Cimento said.

The number of Trump’s “not qualified” nominees shows that “ideology counts far more than competence” to his administration, Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, told Bloomberg Law via Twitter direct message.

Demand Justice is an advocacy organization that has focused on opposing Trump’s judicial nominees.

(Updates with Senate consideration of a new package of judges. A previous version of this story was corrected to clarify ratings given to Judges Posner and Easterbook.)

To contact the reporter on this story: Patrick L. Gregory in Washington at pgregory@bloomberglaw.com

To contact the editors responsible for this story: John Crawley at jcrawley@bloomberglaw.com; Jessie Kokrda Kamens at jkamens@bloomberglaw.com


This.

Is.

All.

Bad.

:wow:


:
:
:damn:
 
Last edited:

℃ertifed

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
277,107
Reputation
-33,767
Daps
584,414
Reppin
The Deep State
The courts have rarely worked for FBA.
No tangibles no vote Baljeet.
Are you stupid?

Do you not know how many times black judges get railroaded? They're IMMENSELY important.

Meanwhile Trump is out here doing shyt like this unopposed:

www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-judges-white-male-nominees_n_5d484719e4b0acb57fd05ec3

www.npr.org/2019/08/05/747013608/trumps-impact-on-federal-courts-judicial-nominees-by-the-numbers

Trump’s judges, U.S. attorneys overwhelmingly white men
 

Let A Fro Be A Fro

Superstar
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Messages
3,187
Reputation
1,400
Daps
23,135
Reppin
Dirty South
That record wouldn't have been possible without the Democrats rubber stamping nominees.

Senate Democrats just gave a huge gift to President Donald Trump: They agreed to expedite votes on 15 of his nominees to lifetime federal court seats because they wanted to go home.


Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) had lined up votes for all those district court nominees last week. Normally, Senate rules require up to 30 hours of waiting time for each nominee ― something Democrats typically take advantage of to delay action on confirming Trump judges. But Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) cut a deal with McConnell on Tuesday to bypass the wait times and let them all get through.

Why? So Democrats could get back to campaigning and focusing on winning re-election in November. The Senate is now out of session until next Tuesday.

Of the 15 nominees, six were confirmed by voice votes on Tuesday. Another one was confirmed on a recorded vote. The remaining eight will get quick votes next week.

It’s a major win for Trump and McConnell, whose No. 1 priority is filling up federal courts with conservative judges ― many of whom are incredibly anti-abortion, anti–LGBTQ rights and anti–voting rights. Trump has gotten 26 circuit court judges confirmed, more than any other president at this point in his term. Another way of putting it: 1 in 7 U.S. circuit court seats is now filled by a judge nominated by Trump.

HuffPost is now a part of Oath
 

Savvir

Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Messages
12,863
Reputation
1,120
Daps
65,829
That record wouldn't have been possible without the Democrats rubber stamping nominees.
They were rubber stamping because they knew they could only delay the appointments and they had to get back to campaigning to actually hold positions during elections.....

this was an example of being between a rock and a hard place....

nikkas who don't follow politics can't understand the nuance.
 

BigAggieLean.

we country, not hillbilly.
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
11,401
Reputation
4,740
Daps
53,471
Reppin
ATL via Tre 4
They were rubber stamping because they knew they could only delay the appointments and they had to get back to campaigning to actually hold positions during elections.....

this was an example of being between a rock and a hard place....

nikkas who don't follow politics can't understand the nuance.
Do you want the nikkas who don’t know to sit this out?
 

Micky Mikey

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
11,970
Reputation
1,802
Daps
63,058
I am voting for action on climate change, student debt, medicare for all, a more pacifist foreign policy and putting an end to fascism. These are all things that effect us all.

Bernie is the man to get it done. I think a successful left leaning presidency will be segway to legitimate reparations talk.
 
Top