Obama's Judicial Legacy

The New York Times says:

Democrats have reversed the partisan imbalance on the federal appeals courts that long favored conservatives, a little-noticed shift with far-reaching consequences for the law and President Obama’s legacy.

For the first time in more than a decade, judges appointed by Democratic presidents considerably outnumber judges appointed by Republican presidents. The Democrats’ advantage has only grown since late last year when they stripped Republicans of their ability to filibuster the president’s nominees.

 

“It’s no surprise that President Obama has been able to transform the ideological makeup of the courts — that happens when you have six years to pick judges and your party controls the Senate,” said Edward Whelan,

First African-American Missouri SCT Judge Confirmed to Federal Court

Ronnie White lost senate confirmation vote 15 years ago but wins this week.

Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice, said the senate confirmation vote "illustrates the importance of last year's changes to Senate rules. Given the Republican track record on judicial nominations in general—and this one in particular—it's not clear that Judge White would have been confirmed if not for reforms allowing a simple majority vote to end a filibuster."

President Obama and Senate Democrats Eager to Confirm Judges Before 2014 Elections

New York Times reports: "With the possibility that Republicans could take the Senate in November, the White House and Senate Democrats are working swiftly to confirm judges to the federal courts in an effort to allow President Obama to leave a lasting liberal imprint on the judiciary."

Republicans, the Times says, are "deeply resentful of Mr. Obama for encouraging Senate Democrats to end the filibuster on all presidential nominations but those to the Supreme Court."  Nevertheless, Republicans slow confirmations through the “blue slip”, which allows each senator veto power over any judge from his or her state.

Effects of Ending the Filibuster for Federal Judicial Nominees

In November, US Senate Democrats triggered the nuclear option of doing away with the filibuster for all judicial nominees except the Supreme Court. "But so far, removing that procedural hurdle hasn't changed much in the Senate, where there hasn't been a single vote on a district court nominee since December." the Huffington Post reports.

Ending Filibuster of Judicial Nominees a Top 3 Lobbying Victory

Ending the filibuster of federal judicial nominees was among the Top 3 biggest lobbying victories of 2013, according to the Capitol Hill newspaper The Hill.  Credit or blame goes to "Fix the Senate Now, a liberal-leaning coalition — including the Alliance for Justice, Common Cause, the Communications Workers of America and the Sierra Club." 

Posner on Senate Confirmation Without the Filibuster

U. Chicago law professor Eric Posner writes that because of the Senate’s new rule ending the filibuster for federal judges below the Supreme Court, "we will see more ideological extremity on the bench—in both directions."

Senate Confirmation Without the Filibuster

Bill Otis at  The Crime and Consequences blog sponsored by the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation quips about the recent end of the filibuster for federal judicial nominees "DoYou Like Stephen Reinhardt? I sure hope you do, because you're about to getlots more judges just like him."  (A reference to the famously liberal and activist judge on the Ninth Circuit.) 

Otis says "Viewed in isolation, having judicial nominations approved by a simple majority vote strikes me as a good idea.  Democracy is, after all, about majority rule."

Republican Judicial Nominees from the Federalist Society

Writing on the US Senate's end to the filibuster for federal judicial nominees (except the Supreme Court), The Wall Street Journal's editorial board says "The next GOP President should line up Federalist Society alumni for judicial nominations like planes waiting to take off at O'Hare International Airport."

Senate Democrats Trigger 'Nuclear' Option to End Filibuster of Judicial Nominees

As the Washington Post explains, "Democrats used a rare parliamentary move to change the rules so that federal judicial nominees and executive-office appointments can advance to confirmation votes by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that has been the standard for nearly four decades."

Video here