Editorial: Trump's Florida judicial picks spur doubts
When the U.S. Senate considers five Floridians who are up for federal judgeships, three of them should be forced to answer a familiar Washington question: What did you know and when did you know it?
Ed Artau and Jordan Pratt are Florida appellate judges who recently wrote opinions sure to please President Donald Trump, who announced their nominations last week.
It would impugn their fitness to be federal judges if they knew at the time that Trump was considering them for the federal bench. Their generally hard-right leanings are an issue, too, casting additional doubt on whether either of them should be confirmed by the Senate.
Trump's third Florida nominee, John Guard, is chief deputy state attorney general. He signed off on the $67 million Medicaid settlement that earmarked $10 million to First Lady Casey DeSantis' Hope Florida Foundation. The money apparently flowed through to a political committee helping Gov. Ron DeSantis defeat the recreational-marijuana amendment last November.
State Attorney Jack Campbell in Tallahassee has begun a criminal investigation into the diversion of that money, and Sen. Rick Scott has said that Guard should have to answer 'some questions' about it. Some obvious ones: Did he know where the money would go? Was it an appropriation that only the Legislature should have made?
Scott isn't on the Senate Judiciary Committee, but Florida's other senator, Ashley Moody, is. Because Moody was Guard's boss when he signed off on the settlement, she should disqualify herself from voting on his nomination.
Artau, a judge of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, flagrantly flattered Trump's cause when the court ruled in February that he could continue suing non-Floridians on the Pulitzer Prize Board in a state court.
Trump claims they defamed him by awarding prizes to the Washington Post and the New York Times for their coverage of alleged Russian interference in the 2020 election. From a First Amendment standpoint, the suit is preposterous.
The main opinion of a three-judge panel gave a simple 'yes' to that jurisdictional question and did not go into the main issue of whether the Pulitzer board had libeled Trump.
Artau's concurring opinion reads as if Trump wrote it. It quoted Trump's claim that it was all 'fake news,' a 'phony witch hunt' and 'a big hoax.' The rest of the 12 pages — six times as long as the opinion — was pro-Trump, too.
Artau has not replied to our email asking if he knew Trump was considering him for a federal judgeship when he wrote that opinion. The public deserves to know.
Artau wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court should reconsider New York Times v. Sullivan, the landmark case that raised the standard for defamation lawsuits by public officials. Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly made the same argument.
In an earlier, unrelated case, Artau dissented from a majority opinion overturning the resisting-arrest conviction of a woman who had been photographing Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort.
Pratt, a judge of the Fifth District Court of Appeal at Daytona Beach, wrote the opinion last month striking down the Florida law allowing minors to obtain a judge's permission for an abortion rather than to have to notify their parents and obtain their consent.
His opinion for a unanimous panel embraced a far-fetched legal theory that the 14th Amendment gives parents an inherent right to be informed and to consent.
The other Floridians whom Trump is nominating are Judge Anne-Leigh Gaylord Moe of Florida's Second District Court of Appeal and Kyle Dudek, a federal magistrate judge in Fort Myers.
All the nominees except Dudek are known members of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization that has had extraordinary influence in judicial appointments by Trump as well as DeSantis. Artau flaunted his Federalist ties when he unsuccessfully sought a Florida Supreme Court appointment from DeSantis.
The society's standing with Trump would appear to be shaky now in light of the tantrum the president pitched last week over a three-judge federal court's ruling against his tariffs. That outburst came just after he had announced the five Florida nominations.
And it was over the top, even for Trump, in that he didn't assail just the ruling but denounced Leonard Leo, former executive vice president of the Federalist Society, and the group itself for 'bad advice they gave me on numerous legal occasions.'
The outburst was likely just another attempt to intimidate federal judges into treating him as deferentially as the Republican Congress does. Nevertheless, there's great danger in his reckless jawboning.
It is evident in a surge of threats against federal judges and their families. A total of 373 were investigated by the U.S. Marshals Service in just the first five months of this year, compared to 509 all last year. There have also been more than 100 unsolicited pizza deliveries, a menacing way of saying 'We know where you live.'
If any judge or family member is harmed, the world will know who incited it.
____
___
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business Upturn
16 minutes ago
- Business Upturn
I regret some of my posts about President Trump: Elon Musk expresses regret
By Aditya Bhagchandani Published on June 11, 2025, 12:44 IST In what appears to be a shift in tone, Elon Musk on Tuesday posted that he regrets some of his recent remarks about President Donald Trump, saying, 'They went too far.' I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025 This comes just days after Trump addressed their ongoing feud, stating he wished Musk 'very well' and suggesting the tech mogul might be seeking a conversation. In a gesture that caught attention, Musk had responded with a heart emoji on X (formerly Twitter), sparking speculation about a possible reconciliation. Tensions between the two escalated last week after Musk called Trump's proposed 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' a 'pork-filled abomination' and accused the President of suppressing Jeffrey Epstein-related files. The latter post, which Musk later deleted, reportedly infuriated Trump, who retaliated with harsh criticism and even threatened to sever government contracts with Musk-led firms. The feud intensified when Musk countered by threatening to halt NASA-linked SpaceX missions and claimed Trump would have lost the 2024 election without his support. He also floated the possibility of impeachment. However, Musk's latest message—posted at 12:34 PM on June 11—marks a notable departure from his confrontational stance, possibly signaling the beginning of a de-escalation. While no official conversation has been confirmed, both camps appear to be softening their positions, leaving the door open for future dialogue. Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.

20 minutes ago
Trump's actions in Los Angeles spur debate over deportation funds in his 'big, beautiful' bill
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' in Congress includes more than tax breaks and spending cuts — it also seeks to pour billions of dollars into the administration's mass deportation agenda. Republican leaders capitalized Tuesday on the demonstrations in Los Angeles, where people are protesting Trump's immigration raids at Home Depot and other places, to make the case for swift passage of their sprawling 1,000-plus-page bill over staunch Democratic opposition. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the One Big Beautiful Bill Act delivers 'much-needed reinforcements,' including 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, $45 billion to expand migrant detention facilities and billions more to carry out at least 1 million deportations a year. 'All you have to do is look at what's happening in Los Angeles to realize that our law enforcement needs all the support that we can possibly give them,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. The focus on some $350 billion in national security funding comes as action on the massive package is lumbering along in Congress at a critical moment. Trump wants the bill on his desk by the Fourth of July. But Senate Republicans trying to heave it to passage without Democrats are also running up against objections from within their GOP ranks over the details. At the same time, Democrats are warning that Trump's executive reach into California — sending in the National Guard over the governor's objections and calling up the Marines — is inflaming tensions in what had been isolated protests in pockets of LA. They warned the president's heavy-handed approach has the potential to spread, if unchecked, to other communities nationwide. 'We are at a dangerous inflection point in our country,' said Rep. Jimmy Gomez, who represents the Los Angeles area. 'Trump created this political distraction to divide us and keep our focus away from his policies that are wreaking havoc on our economy and hurting working families," he said. "It's a deliberate attempt by Trump to incite unrest, test the limits of executive power and distract from the lawlessness of his administration.' At its core, the bill extends some $4.5 trillion in existing tax breaks that would otherwise expire at the end of the year without action in Congress, cutting some $1.4 trillion in spending over the decade to help offset costs. The Congressional Budget Office found the bill's changes to Medicaid and other programs would leave an estimated 10.9 million more people without health insurance and at least 3 million each month without food stamps from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. At the same time, CBO said the package will add some $2.4 trillion to deficits over the decade. One emerging area of concern for Republican leaders has been the bill's status before the Senate parliamentarian's office, which assesses whether the package complies with the strict rules used for legislation under the so-called budget reconciliation process. Late Monday, Republicans acknowledged potential 'red flags' coming from the parliamentarian's office that will require changes in the House bill before it can be sent to the Senate. Leaders are using the reconciliation process because it allows for simple majority passage in both chambers, were GOP majorities are razor-thin. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said Republicans are preparing to address the concerns with a vote in the House, possibly as soon as this week, to change the package. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer seized on the House's upcoming do-over vote as a chance for Republicans who are dissatisfied with the package to reassert their leverage and 'force the bill back to the drawing board.' 'They say they don't like parts of the bill — now is their opportunity to change it,' Schumer said. On Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance was dispatched to speak with one GOP holdout, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has pushed for deeper spending reductions in the bill to prevent skyrocketing deficits from adding to the nation's $36 trillion debt load. Other Republican senators have raised concerns about the health care cuts. But Republicans are in agreement on border security, deportation and military funding, over the objections of Democrats who fought vigorously during the committee process to strip those provisions from the bill. The package includes about $150 billion for border security and deportation operations, including funding for hiring 10,000 new ICE officers — with what Johnson said are $10,000 hiring bonuses — as well as 3,000 new Border Patrol agents and other field operations and support staff. There's also funding for a daily detention capacity for 100,000 migrants and for flights for 1 million deportations annually. The package includes $46 billion for construction of Trump's long promised wall between the U.S.-Mexico border. Additionally, the bill includes $150 billion for the Pentagon, with $5 billion for the military deployment in support of border security, along with nearly $25 billion for Trump's 'Golden Dome' defense system over the U.S. Separately, the bill adds another $21 billion for the Coast Guard. Democrats have argued against the deportations, and warned that Trump appears to be stirring up protests so he can clamp down on migrant communities. Rep. Nanette Barragan — whose district represents the suburban city of Paramount, where the weekend Home Depot raid touched off protests — implored Americans: 'Listen to the words of this administration: They're using words like insurrection. They're using words like invasion.' She warned the administration is laying the groundwork for even steeper actions. 'That's a concern,' she said. 'That is dangerous. It's wrong.'
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk says he regrets some posts he made about Trump
(Reuters) -Billionaire Elon Musk said on Wednesday that he regrets some of the posts he made last week about U.S President Donald Trump, in a message on his social media platform X. "I regret some of my posts about President Donald Trump last week. They went too far," Musk wrote. Trump and Musk began exchanging insults last week on social media, with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO describing the president's sweeping tax and spending bill as a "disgusting abomination." Musk's post comes days after Trump said his relationship with Musk was over.