Two democratic judge appointees to federal appeals courts expressed reluctance to retire during President Donald Trump’s administration, claiming the president has not fielded impressive judicial nominees, reports The Daily Caller.

The two unnamed judges told Buzzfeed News that they have concerns about the temperament of Trump’s judicial candidates, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of his nominees attained approving reviews from legal trade associations.

Once circuit judge even claimed that Trump’s nominees lacked the proper qualifications necessary for judicial service. According to Buzzfeed, both of the judges were appointed by Democratic presidents.

“Given the caliber of nominees I’m seeing, I’m not comfortable creating a spot that might be filled by someone consistent with the qualifications, or lack of qualifications, of some of the folks I’ve seen nominated,” the judge said.

This is just a plainly false statement because the Daily Caller reports that most of the president’ judicial nominees have earned the approval of the American Bar Association (ABA) a powerful trade group that vets candidates for the federal bench.

The judge is eligible to assume senior status, a quasi-retirement under which aging judges may leave active service but still participate in a handful of cases. Another thing these liberal judges like to say is that the president is “blatantly politicizing” the courts, as they expressed anxiety about Trump’s agenda.

“This president is someone who I am just so anxious about what he might do and also the quality of some of the nominees, some of whom have now withdrawn,” the judge said. “That makes it a greater concern for me than if it were a different president who happened to be Republican but was making wise decisions with respect to the judiciary and wasn’t so blatantly politicizing it.”

The Daily Caller reports that many judges, especially ones at the circuit court level have ideological loyalties to certain legal principles or modes of interpretation, and schedule retirement so as to ensure they are succeeded by a like-minded judge.

These statements, however, are rare since judges rarely ever interact with the press, especially concerning a topic like this one and as sensitive and politically fraught as retirement.

“‘Of Trump’s 58 nominees, 54 secured ‘qualified’ or ‘well qualified’ ratings from the association’s standing committee on the judiciary. Trump’s circuit court appointees in particular have fared well under ABA scrutiny — 15 of his 18 nominees obtained ‘well qualified’ ratings,’ reports The Daily Caller.”

One study suggests that the ABA, which supports a number of progressive social causes, tends to favor Democratic appointees, though the group insists its vetting process is scrupulously non-partisan.

Trump’s administration has faced several nomination blunders this year, however. Three nominees withdrew from consideration in December over concerns about experience and temperament.

One of the most noticeable blunders this year was FEC Commissioner, Andrew Petersen, a nominee for the federal trial court in Washington, D.C., who withdrew after failing to answer basic questions about trial procedure during his confirmation hearing.

Jeff Mateer and Brett Talley, nominees for trial courts in Texas and Alabama, also withdrew given their histories of inflammatory rhetoric on social issues.

Reference Tags
LIKE us to get conservative news:
  • Tomas

    Dear DC STATESMAN, Couldn’t you find a recent photo of the SCOTUS?

  • Spunky

    Oldies will pass on at some point

  • michael schimanski

    I always thought the only requirement to be a judge was to follow and uphold the Constitution of the United States but as most can see since obama that judges now have to be political and interject there own politics into their findings . We have all seen that with their rejecting president Trump’s ability to stop the protection of America .

    • Big Ed

      Follow and uphold the Constitution indeed. We have a couple of judges who only read the Constitution so they won’t accidentally make a ruling that conforms to the Constitution. The liberal’s favorite judge uses foreign laws to make HER rulings-she is a Clinton appointee.

      • Fred Barton

        I would imagine that most judges try to refer to the Constitution, at least their version of it. If you are right, you are right. If you are wrong you are probably left. ‘Left’, as in leaving behind the standards, for new ones.

    • Tar Heel58

      There should be repucushions for their actions.

  • Timothy Thompson

    Oh you mean the opinion of Ruth Badder Ginsberg that outstanding ACLU appointed judge who told people that our constitution should not be the example to start a new democratic countries beginnings. Oh and more than likely Sotomayor another socialist who appointed by Obama always votes in favor of big government and against conservative originating principles.

    • David McAllister

      Both Ginsberg and Obama publicly stated that they don’t like the U.S. form of government. They prefer one like Spain’s, which is a democratic MONARCHY. Not a shocker. Obonehead tried to convert the presidency into a monarchy.

      • Rich Girod

        any proof of that statement?

      • Tar Heel58

        If you where awake and saw and heard the same things I did what more proof do you need?

      • Rich Girod

        r u David McAllisters lawyer aka mouth piece?

      • Tar Heel58

        I’m not as ignorant as you and I’m nobody’s mouth piece . As much as it pained me I watched Obama and while he had many people mesmerized I picked up on his absolute hatred for US. As time passed he became embroiled in the fact that he had pulled it off, but alas he didn’t pull it off. The People seen him for the person he really is. Nothing to be proud about. Legacy, what a joke!

      • Robert Kahlcke

        If you were whelped from a swine who fornicated a goat you may feel the same way.

  • Barry McMiles

    The ABA is the reason that there are jokes around with busloads of lawyers going over a cliff. Pathetic and political and why there is NO justice in the USA.

  • Darrell G. Walton

    Buzzfeed???!!! What a libtard propagandist rag!!! It puts DC Statesman’s integrity in question for spreading Buzzfeed crap!

  • irene

    The fact that President Trump operates “beyond & above” their “comfort zone” does NOT mean that he does not have the ability to make solid proper judgements or choices beyond their understanding! It simply means that President Trump is far beyond & above their habitual “political” realm!

  • Big Ed

    There is a ranch in Arizona and when you need to get rid of a supreme court judge, you just send them to the ranch for a vacation. It worked for Obama.

    • Name

      I believe the ranch you are referring to is in Texas not Arizona. It was a Texas judge that gave the cause of death was natural causes.

      • David McAllister

        Judges dont determine cause of death. Medical examiner’s do.

      • And i read that there was no autopsy. I guess we will never really know whether it was natural or not!

      • Name

        Well in the case of Judge Scalia it did happen.

      • David McAllister

        You’re confusing “announcing” with determining. Determination requires an autopsy unless cause is visibly obvious (Gunshot, car accident, etc)

      • Name

        This is the words from the link. “was declared dead of natural causes without an autopsy being performed. I was not shocked to hear that a county justice of the peace agreed to issue the death certificate without visiting the death scene or seeing the body for herself.”

  • deusexmachina1

    No guy in a dress, gown, or robe will ever be the boss of me….

  • Name

    The judges are appointed by a president so a president can fire them. That is exactly what President Trump should do for bad behavior.

    • David McAllister

      The President can only appoint judges. He can’t fire them. I wish it weren’t true, but it is.

      • Name

        Read Article III section one of the constitution.” The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.

      • David McAllister

        What does that have to do with this conversation? The President can’t fire any judge.

      • Name

        Then going by your thinking former FBI director could not be fired by the President.

  • David McAllister

    They’re complaint….”They’re not liberal like us”. To quote Obama, “Elections have consequences. If you want things your way, win an election”. I love that quote by Obonehead.

  • Juju Cope

    “Sad it may take an uprising of the people in America to restore Constitutional government in our country. Right now it’s government by whim what people think is right or best now. It’s like all these decisions of district court judges to overturn “Presidential Executive Orders”. Now you’ve got 300 hundred and something district court judges that they could be countermanding each other, and I mean you cannot run government that way but it is being tolerated. It’s being allowed because we have inept leadership in the US Congress today who is supposed to ‘impeach them’. You know our US Congress is the only body in our government given the power of impeachment because they were expected to be responsible and their being elected by the people every two years that they would be the most accountable to the people. So they were the only branch of government given the power of impeachment. They should have impeached all those judges. They should have also defunded them. They were given the power of the purse. The 9th circuit court of appeals should be defunded. It’s doing nothing but costing us money. . .over eighty percent (80%) of their decisions get overturned anyway. It’s a waste of our time, our energy, our money. All the congress has to do is say we are defunding the 9th circuit. We are cutting that out of the budget. They were given power to do that or impeach those who do things so blatantly unconstitutional. We don’t have leadership with the courage or the understanding on basic constitutional issues to do things like that . . .”

    All of the above can be prevented as far as ‘it taking an uprising of the American people to restore Constitutional government in our Country’, because the US Congress is inept and not doing what they were elected to do. No district court judge(s) should be allowed to overturn our duly elected Commander-in-Chief’s Presidential Executive Order(s)’. It’s time for the US Congress to be responsible and accountable to the American people and do what they were elected to do, and that is either ‘impeach or defund’ any district court judge(s) that overturns President Trump’s Presidential Executive Orders.

    Excerpt set in quotes taken from:
    Judge Moore Defeat #RicksRant (1st para begins at approximately 12:00 mark)

    • Good points. Now the out-of-office Obama, the great organizer, is now organizing a movement of protest Trump actions, followed by lawsuits to block whatever, and find a socialist judge to file the suit under to get the ruling they seek!

  • Pam Johnson

    These judges should be thrown off the bench. They disrespect the law. Traitors to the constitution.

  • austin farrell

    I went to Columbia Law ,Practiced on Wall street,was general counserl of a NYStock exchange company and did a bunch of other law practice things. People have been developing
    laws about human relationships -like marriage, crimes, property etc for hundreds of years.(Laws in England were mostly judge made with two objects : Have it available to be known to the citizenry so that people could act in accordance with it and then to have people in like circumstances treated the same way, Today we have so many laws and regulations that even the experts cant find it definitively or interpret it . Second we have a judiciary dominated by judges that believe that thier personal view of “social justice” deterimines the meaning and application of laws. ie the way to sociual justice can always be found by in the very broadest interpretationof the “due process” and “equal protection” clauses o f the US Constitution. Justice Ginsburg accepted those ideas in 1957 at Columbia.. I was there .-But I didn’t. I am a Scalia admirer , ( at Columbia we learned tha tthe rules of trial procedure could always be found in a book; didn’t need to study them much.

  • Wmichaelmic

    Unnamed judges, why unnamed judges? Don’t they have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and take ownership of their statements? Or are they unnamed because the author can’t name them? Judges currently serving on the bench aren’t in any position to vet possible appointees. Seems like they want to insure another liberal activist takes their seat. Isn’t that politicizing the process?

  • Fred Barton

    The “ideological purity” requirement is not uncommon; what is uncommon is a judge equating this to judicial qualifications to the press, thus stating in effect that they themselves are superior because of their progressive ideology. Sounds like they take after one of the more liberal Supreme Court Justices.

  • domar1938

    Name the judges! They just proved themselves unqualified to render any decision other than possibility the need to go to the restroom. They must have an acceptable image painted on their mirror as their own would be too disgusting to behold.

  • dan690

    Liberals do not want any judge that will follow the law and the constitution.

  • donl

    I thought Judges were supposed to be impartial, fair minded, legal eagles, I think they were until Obama came along with his Communist Style Rhetoric.

  • Jmanjo

    These Democratic judges are the ones that need to be removed from office for not being qualified as an inept not decent for office idiot Kenyan got them their bench seat!

  • Doc Savage

    Judges can be removed from office through Impeacnment ( ie for conviction of treason, bribery , high crimes and misdemeanors [which include violation of their oath of office]) and ‘Bad Behaviour’. Judges were appointed while they were in a state of ‘Good Behaviour’, this encompasses the premise that justice is ‘ blind’.ALL judges must be impartial or ‘Justice’ deviates from the realm of being impartial to that of forcing biased political opinions on the public ….in the guise of enforcing Laws ( ie Legislating from the bench). Due to the fact that the entire Government is corrupt…the Congress will not perform its duties brcause of the unspoken’quid pro quo’ that exists between the swamp rats that have no discerniblr differences rxcept a meaningless R or D after their name. It is the voters that are responsible for the inception and perpetuation of this charade….We are the ones that voted the Commies into office and started the plague….so it will be up to the voters to reverse this Commie infiltration. This will require resolve and patience…a literal 100 year effort that will require laser precision to return to a Constitutional Government. As Ben Franklin said when asked ….What kind of Government did you give us….he answered ‘A Constitutiona; Republic….if you can keep it!!!’. WELL WE AIN”T DOIN” OUR JOBS AND WE”LL LOSE THIS COUNTRY TOTALLY TO WHINERS, SOCIALISTS, AND CRY BABIES IF WE DON”T STAY ON TARGET AND GET EDUCATION AND JUSTICE BACK TO WHERE PEOPLE LEARN AND JUDGES ENFORCE LAWS…NOT GRADE THEIR OWN PAPERS IN SCHOOL AND FORCE US TO COMPLY WITH THEIR SOCIALIST BIASES !!

  • Nikola’s Notion

    Judges are people. They can sometimes be ignorant, stupid, lacking in good judgment, crazy or even just plain evil (viz. Alcee Hastings). They are for the most part political creatures, otherwise they would probably have never been appointed to the bench, especially a US District Court or US Circuit Court of Appeals. They often care far more about the outcome of a case and its political effects and far less about the established law (the Constitution, statutes, rules, regulations, treaties, executive orders, and cases) and its undergirding of the Republic. than they should. They have biases.

    When it comes to Trump, Left-Lib-Prog judges have imbibed with their morning coffee the fantasy-nightmare of their fellow Lefties: Trump is a fascist at heart and an incipient Hitler figure. They imagine themselves as heroes, protecting our constitutional order, established liberties and historical traditions (as they see them) against the descent of Trump’s fascism upon the entire country. They ask themselves on each high profile case: “if I could have enjoined Hitler’s tyranny, would I? Of course, I would.” And then proceed to make bad law.

    The only way to counter this insanity is to create several hundred new open judgeships and appoint loads of real lawyers who care about the law itself and put their biases aside like the ones Trump has favored to date. If they favor textualism, or originalism, or natural law theory, or law and economics theory, so much the better. With all these new judges, the effects of these old Dem appointees will be diluted and many will retire. (Reagan did exactly this same thing, while in office, thanks to Ed Meese’s advice and hard work on nominee selection.)

  • Brenda

    More “unnamed” sources. Really, these “judges” either need to stand up and be named, or sit down and shut up. Our whole judicial system is a mess with these Liberal, Progressive judges.

  • Robert Kahlcke

    We need to purge the courts of all operatives of the Democrat-Communist-Islamic Terrorist Organization, FORTHWITH.

  • hiphop

    Those two took an oath o uphold the constitution which they have been a failure at. The constitution cannot and should not be rewritten or changed because of one’s personal feelings, beliefs or political affiliations. These two need to step down they are an embarrassment to this country and it constitution. (possibly treasonous)