General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsworth reading - Slate "The Solution to the Trump Judge Problem Nobody Wants to Talk About"
BY DAHLIA LITHWICK AND MARK JOSEPH STERN
SEPT 06, 20225:20 PM
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/09/trump-judge-aileen-cannon-court-reform.html
Legal analysts lit up social media on Monday in response to the broad and potentially devastating order by Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a Donald Trump appointee to the Southern District of Florida, temporarily halting the criminal investigation of the former president and his alleged pilfering of classified documents. Her order further authorized a special master to identify and return the small fraction of materials seized in last months court-approved search of Trumps Mar-a-Lago residence that may belong to him. One analyst after another meticulously detailed the failings of Cannons reasoning: It was untethered to the law, a political conclusion in search of a legal rationale, deeply problematic, laughably bad. At some point, one truly runs out of euphemisms for lawless partisan hackery.
Its possible to agree with every one of these criticisms but still find them less than satisfying. Because at the end of the day, no matter how much withering criticism she faces, Cannon still gets to put on the black robe and run interference for her benefactor. She will still get a standing ovation at some future Federalist Society gathering. She remains in control of this case. But its not just Cannon: Many smart lawyers also noted that the Justice Department now faces the unenviable task of having to appeal this decision up to higher courts that are filled with Trump appointees, which takes the sting out of the opprobrium: For all we know, the Trump-stacked 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or five radical justices on the Supreme Court may also greet her outrageous decision with a standing ovation.
So the problem is not just the extreme and heinous flaws in Cannons ruling. Its also the Trump-shaped world in which Cannon operates, with impunity, which we will all have to endure for the foreseeable future. Its the brutal reality that we may face a steady stream of depraved decisions like Cannons for the rest of our livesand the pain of hearing from every quarter that nothing can be done to remedy it.
snip
There are solutions out there for the problem of Trumps runaway judges. Expanding the courtseven just the lower courtsis the most bulletproof. Congress has periodically added seats to the federal judiciary from its inception to help judges keep up with ever-ballooning caseloads. Todays litigants (who are not named Donald Trump) often face yearslong court delays. The Judicial Conference, a nonpartisan government institution that develops administrative policies, has begged Congress to add seats to the lower courts. Some Republicans have supported the idea in recognition of the crisis facing our understaffed judiciary. Letting Joe Biden balance out far-right courts like the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appealswhich will weigh Cannons ruling if the government appealswould go a long way to tame the jurisprudence of Trumpism. When district court judges know their radical decisions will be overturned on appeal, they may be less likely to swing for the fences in the first place.
snip - much more.
Well worth reading it all - it lays out what we are up against.
Rhiannon12866
(205,405 posts)crickets
(25,980 posts)It sounds reasonable, even necessary. Why stop with the lower courts? I can think of a higher court that needs a little expansion as well.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,346 posts)14 would make it very unlikely that a future Moscow Mitch could subvert the court.
crickets
(25,980 posts)but 14 is luckier number and suits me fine.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,346 posts)crickets
(25,980 posts)it's a deal. 15 it is! 😉
ShazzieB
(16,399 posts)SlimJimmy
(3,180 posts)That's what the repukes will do when they control Congress. Did anyone think this through?
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,346 posts)dalton99a
(81,492 posts)Bayard
(22,073 posts)Expand the Supreme Court. Something's gotta give.
alwaysinasnit
(5,066 posts)liberalla
(9,247 posts)SunSeeker
(51,557 posts)These fucking district Court judges like Aileen Qannon are LIFETIME appointments. She is only 41! This problem is not going away. We must address this now.
live love laugh
(13,109 posts)kentuck
(111,097 posts)Otherwise...
onenote
(42,703 posts)The authors suggest that "Letting Joe Biden balance out far-right courts like the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appealswhich will weigh Cannons ruling if the government appealswould go a long way to tame the jurisprudence of Trumpism." But how would that work. This is current make-up of the 11th circuit: 1 GWB, 1 Clinton, 3 Obama, 6 Trump, 1 vacant. So 7 Repubs, 4 Democrats, 1 pending Biden nomination. So how many judges should be added to allow Biden to "balance" the court? Two (leveling the R-D divide)? Five (giving Biden the same number as Trump, but also giving the Democrats a 10-7 advantage?
And what about a court like the First Circuit, which currently has 3 Obama, 1 Clinton, 1 Biden and 1 Biden pending. A 5-0 Democratic/Republican split. If a vacancy occurs, should Biden be barred from naming a replacement? How do you achieve "balance"?
Similarly, the 2d Circuit has 1 GWB, 1 Clinton, 2 Obama, 5 Trump, 4 Biden (with a Biden nominee pending to replace the Clinton nominee). IF the GWB appointee or one or more of the Obama appointees leave, and Biden replaced them, then wouldn't that unbalance the court even further?
In short, there are good arguments for increasing the number of judges on certain courts because of a caseload backlog. But basing the number of added judges in order to create "balance" isn't likely to fly with members of either party.