HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » "Senate Democrats vowed t...

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 03:30 PM

"Senate Democrats vowed to reject end-of-year judicial nominations and were true to their word"

Donald Trump Suffers Setback as Senate Rejects Hundreds of Nominations

By Dan Cancian On 1/5/19 at 10:43 AM

President Donald Trump has suffered a setback after the Senate knocked hundreds of nominations back to the White House. As the 116th Congress began on Thursday, the Senate sent back over 270 nominations from the previous session, as well as a host of foreign service nominees.

<...>

In December, Senate Democrats vowed to reject end-of-year judicial nominations and were true to their word. According to The Hill, the rejections included approximately 70 judicial nominees. Politico reported on Wednesday that 31 of the 70 nominees were pending on the Senate floor, while another 21 were waiting on a vote from the Judiciary Committee at the end of the session.

A tracker from The Washington Post and the Partnership for Public Service shows the Senate has so far approved 434 nominations out of the 707 positions that require confirmation. The Senators’ decision to knock back a large number of nominations—the full list was published in the Congressional Record on Friday—has now thrown them into jeopardy.

Trump now faces having to renominate the picks to ensure they are considered for the new session of Congress. It is possible that the nominations, or some of them at least, will be confirmed, but the process of having to renominate them is expected to be time consuming.

<...>

More: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-judicial-nominations-116th-congress-us-senate-charles-schumer-1280392


I heard this on the local news this morning and had to really search to find an article on it!

For reference to the nomination "tracker" mentioned in the OP article, check it out here - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/?utm_term=.c0a64ff75018 (apparently that link provides updates once a week on Mondays)

9 replies, 614 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply "Senate Democrats vowed to reject end-of-year judicial nominations and were true to their word" (Original post)
BumRushDaShow Jan 6 OP
Cha Jan 6 #1
BumRushDaShow Jan 6 #2
Cha Jan 6 #3
BumRushDaShow Jan 6 #4
Hermit-The-Prog Jan 6 #5
BumRushDaShow Jan 6 #6
Hermit-The-Prog Jan 6 #7
BumRushDaShow Jan 6 #8
Hermit-The-Prog Jan 6 #9

Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 03:39 PM

1. Mahalo, BRDS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 04:33 PM

2. He Cha!

Hope you are well!

I was glad to see that Democrats were doing what they could and will continue to do so!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #2)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 05:49 PM

3. I know.. it's brilliant!

Happy Blue Year, BRDS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 05:56 PM

4. And Happy Blue Tsunami to you!!!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 06:57 PM

5. the 434 still bother me

Obstruction should be easy considering the quality of nominees coming from Cheetolini's background handlers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 07:12 PM

6. I think in many cases

quite a few are SES positions (Regional Directors, etc.) which require Senate confirmation. At that level, they often pull them from the civil servant management pool (including those who went through agency Executive training programs) and they usually do those confirmations in batches. You also have all of those U.S. Attorneys around the country who would have had to have gone through the process (one might recall the last stand of Preet Bharara before he was unceremoniously fired from the SDNY)! Did a quick search and there are 93 of them....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 08:23 PM

7. thanks!

I didn't check the details. It's just very disheartening to think of the quality of nominees to the judiciary that we could have had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 08:31 PM

8. Well - let me post this again

Obama will leave office with 329 of his judicial nominees confirmed to lifetime posts on federal courts. That includes two U.S. Supreme Court justices and four judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the two most powerful courts in the nation. Because of Obama, Democratic appointees now have a 7-4 advantage on the D.C. panel, and those judges will play a major role in deciding cases during the Trump administration related to environmental regulations, health care, national security, consumer protections and challenges to executive orders.

Obama also tilted the partisan makeup of circuit courts. Nine of the country’s 13 appeals courts now have majority Democratic appointees, compared with just one when he took office in 2009.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/barack-obama-judicial-legacy_us_586c1944e4b0de3a08f9eb1f


The above has been our firewall!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 6, 2019, 08:44 PM

9. firewall, indeed

That saved us from Trump actions in several cases.

McConnell did his damnedest to keep openings for RWNJs. In spite of Obama appointing similar numbers to past 2-term presidents, as shown in the article, GOPers have obstructed enough to build up a backlog.

The difference between Merrick Garland and Brett Kavanaugh is warning enough about the quality of nominees by those feeding lists to Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread