https://www.foxnews.com/politics/how-trump-has-reshaped-the-federal-judiciary-3-years-into-his-presidency Amidst all of the distractions and witch hunts, Trump has been slowly but surely pursuing his goal of MAGA. His influence on the courts will be felt long after he is gone ---- the article also notes the relative youth of his judicial picks ---- and he has been slowly bringing balance back to the courts. And his choices haven't been partisan hacks, either. Even critics of the president admit the qualifications of his nominees. This pleases me because I don't like the idea of liberal judges trying to legislate from the bench. I'm much more comfortable with constitutional-scholar-types. Thoughts?
Well done, Mr. President. His next 5 years will be epic. 1-2 more Supreme Court Justices appointed and hundreds more Constitutional Judges sworn in to get rid of the far left progressives who are masquerading as Judges.
That is Trump's legacy carved in stone. Stacking the courts with conservative judges is Trump building his legacy on a foundation of solid granite blocks. Obama built his legacy on a foundation of Jello with his "pen and phone" and his executive orders, and Trump kicked it all over like it was a wobbly card table. Any predecessor of Trump's who tries to kick over his legacy is going to have 5 broken toes.
You know, I'm not really interested in getting into a back and forth on this ... but President Obama got more than 300 confirmed. Reagan and Clinton got the most confirmed (also more than 300 each).
Both too old to be in such a position and should be replaced. If they weren't such partisan hacks trying to hold out they would stand down.
And all 3 of those had 8 years in which to do so! By comparison Trump is exceeding them by far in only 3 years.
This is why the dem clown show wants to affect the 2020 election like the good Russians they are. They want the Senate so they can block constitutional originalists.
Obama 329 in 96 months, averaging 3.4 judges per month. Trump 192 in 36 months, averaging 5.3 judges per month
Yes, he did. And Obama's last Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, should have been confirmed but Mitch McConnell blocked it.
Obama got most of his appointments confirmed during his first 5 years. After that the Republican majority Congress systematically blocked him. It looks like Congress was helpful to Trump during his first two years. If he gets another term, we'll see what happens.
During Trump's first two years, Republicans controlled the House and the Senate. That made it easy for Trump to get confirmations, and easier for Republicans to get laws passed. His rate is likely slowing down, for the same reasons that Obama's did, now that his Party doesn't control both chambers.
You're right, Obama got two Supreme Court judges confirmed. They wanted to prevent him from getting three.
Obama appointed 334 judges in eight years. Obama appointed 124 judges in his first three years. Trump has appointed 187 in three years. TRUMP broke the record for judges appointed in their first term. MAGA!!!!!!
Actually not. If the Democrats had the Senate they would have confirmed Merrick Garland but they didn't have the Senate so the claim that you are making is just self entitlement. If Hillary would have won (by a landslide) they would have confirmed Merrick Garland but she didn't have win so, again, the claim that you are making is just self entitlement.
You either misunderstand my position, or you are trying to intentionally misrepresent it. Based on the fact that you so dishonestly cut out the second sentence, I'm assuming you're intentionally trying to misrepresent my position. That's dishonest, it's a pathetic way to pretend to participate in a debate, and it might even be against forum rules. (For the sake of honesty, I've added the second sentence back onto my quote, in bold.) For the record, I'm an Independent (but you've been here long enough to know that.) I've been consistently opposed to the politicization of the courts since the day I joined this board. The reason I prefer "conservative" judges over "liberal" judges is because conservative judges are more likely to follow the constitution, whereas liberal judges are more likely to attempt to legislate from the bench. I'm also pleased to see how qualified Trump's judicial nominees are. If you re-read the article (and my post) you'll notice reference to both of these things. There is no partisan hackery to be found. If you'd re-read the article (and my post) you'll see reference to the fact that Trump's nominees merely return balance to the courts, they reduce the influence of liberal judges (who are more prone to try to legislate from the bench), and Trump's nominees are more qualified than the nominees of his predecessors. These are all good things and should please everyone (except the most partisan hacks.) This illustrates why it is important for Trump to have four more years. From the article: "Bernstein said that, even with all the new judges, Trump’s many appointees have merely brought the legal system back towards balance ideologically. “The judiciary still leans left because of holdover Obama and Clinton appointees. You would need a second Trump term to change that."
