Trump picks controversial McConnell ally for powerful appeals court

[Eugene]

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN) — President Donald Trump announced Friday that he would name Justin Walker, a favorite of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, to one of the most powerful appellate courts in the country.

Walker will be one of the youngest nominees ever for a seat on the US District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and the nomination will draw controversy as just last year Walker was confirmed to a district court in Kentucky, despite having received a "not qualified" rating" from the American Bar Association.

The nomination, coming while much of the country is closed down because of the coronavirus pandemic, is the latest move by the President to reshape the appellate courts with a record number of his nominees.

The DC appeals court, located blocks from the Supreme Court, has jurisdiction over federal agencies and is acknowledged as a breeding ground for future Supreme Court justices. Chief Justice John Roberts served there, as did Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama's final nominee to the bench, which was blocked by McConnell.

-snip-

By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter
Updated 1501 GMT (2301 HKT) April 3, 2020


Read more: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/03/politics/justin-walker-dc-appeals-court/index.html

---

Related: Judge Justin Walker, Deemed 'Not Qualified' by ABA, Is Trump's Pick for DC Circuit (National Law Journal)

[Iliyah]

1. Senate republicans are coming back for the vote? . . .

I think not, and this is not a national security matter. Stay at home assholes.

[SharonAnn]

8. McConnell and the Senate didn't come back for the pandemic vote because of this.

"As the Covid-19 crisis was unfurling last month, McConnell and Kavanaugh travelled to Kentucky for Walker's ceremonial swearing in, according to the Courier Journal. They were joined by former White House counsel Don McGahn. "

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Plans have been thrown about online

as to how to reverse some of this judicial thievery come 2021. Don't think it can't be done, everyone said McConnell couldn't do what McConnell already did. Glenn Kirschner floats a review of all judicial nominees to filter for qualifications or lack thereof, for example. He' reminds me of a relief pitcher in baseball who says "Just give me the ball!"

[lagomorph777]

3. Investigate all the Trumputin cronies installed on the bench. Most will have criminal backgrounds.

Then impeach their asses.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. "Most will have criminal backgrounds"

or relatives seeking favorable legal rulings. 'My cousin, Little Joe the Snake, would like to sell ....'

[maxrandb]

13. Hey, just have Biden send DOJ and physically remove these jacknuts

Senate already proved that a president can do whatever the fuck he wants to.

Fuck em. Let's see if they can get 2/3 of the Senate to impeach a Democrat...no matter what the fuck he does.

Besides, I can't remember which president said it about the courts, but it was something like; "he made his ruling, let him try to enforce it".

Hey, the fucking gloves need to come off.

We may have seen a new precedent set.

See, a Retrumplican president gets to do whatever the fuck he wants, followed by a Democratic President getting to do whatever the fuck they want.

To me, that's a better option than Retrumplican Presidents getting to do whatever the fuck they want, followed by a Democratic President following the rules, followed by a Retrumplican president doing whatever the fuck he wants.

Democrats should not be the only ones required to obey laws and norms.

[yaesu]

4. one of the courts deciding on the Medicaid work requirements, he's in that plan to destroy Medicaid

[howardmappel]

6. False testimony

I suspect that most of Trump's nominees lied in their application materials, e.g., disclosure, and lied in their confirmation testimony. Indict them, convict them and then make them an offer they can't refuse. Resign and you get a lighter sentence. Don't resign, you go away for longer and you get impeached.

[pecosbob]

7. An 'unqualified' rating is justification for impeachment

For that matter, simple disapproval of prior rulings is justification for impeachment...you only need two thirds of the Senate.

[Massacure]

11. It's not just two thirds of the senate, it is also one half of the House

And getting 2/3 of the Senate to agree to something is actually a pretty tall task.

[Polybius]

12. Wait what?

"simple disapproval of prior rulings is justification for impeachment" you say? That's crazy. Sometimes past rulings are terrible and need to be overturned. Brown v. Board of Education overturned precedent. Citizens United is precedent. That needs to go now.

I'm sorry, but the only justification for impeachment is high crimes and misdemeanors.

[maxrandb]

14. That's so 2016

Apparently, as long as 2/3 of the Senate won't agree to hold a president accountable, they can do whatever the fuck they want to.

Fuck that Kumbaya shit. That was so yesterday.

[Polybius]

15. More like so Constitution

We will no be impeaching any Judges or Justices that were confirmed with an "unqualified" rating, or who have voted against precedent. None of our candidates would ever take this extreme position. Not Biden, not Bernie, not AOC or anyone else.

[MarcA]

9. Again, this will lead eventually to more Federal and State Officials simply

disregarding rulings of the USSC and Appellate Courts.

[lastlib]

10. "The American people should have a voice" in the selection of judges....

[dalton99a]

16. Kick