
Will Trump get to pick US Supreme Court justices in his second term?
Legal experts suggest that Donald Trump may have the opportunity to appoint additional Supreme Court justices during a potential second term, potentially reshaping the court's direction for decades. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Roberts may face pressure to retire, allowing Trump to install younger, like-minded individuals. Experts have said Trump might appoint loyalist justice.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Can Trump overhaul judiciary?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Can Trump pick judges?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Trump may seek loyalty over ideology
During his first term in office, President Donald Trump appointed 226 federal court judges, including three US Supreme Court justices. Trump successfully installed judges who promoted his political agenda, including overturning the landmark ruling from 1973 that declared the Constitution guaranteed the right to abortion, Roe v. Wade.But something unusual appears to be unfolding in his second term. Rather than reinforcing Trump-era policies, federal judges — even those appointed by Trump himself — are now halting key parts of the president's second-term initiatives. So, a question that keeps popping up on everyone's mind is that- Will Donald Trump appoint Supreme Court judges in the US?Trump may have the opportunity to appoint new Supreme Court justices during his second term in office, legal experts told Newsweek. During his first term in office, Trump appointed three justices to the US Supreme Court, thus significantly influencing the judiciary system. Trump may have another chance to nominate a justice in the coming years- —an appointment that could shape the Court's direction for decades. Such a move would likely have profound effects on public policy, particularly in areas like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, immigration, and executive power.Conservative-leaning Justices Clarence Thomas (76), Samuel Alito (75), and Chief Justice John Roberts (70) are already facing calls from some on the right to consider retirement in the coming years. With Republicans currently holding control of the presidency and a 53-seat majority in the Senate, they are in a strong position to confirm new Supreme Court justices without Democratic support.Some argue that Republicans should take a lesson from Democrats, who have previously faced setbacks when their justices chose not to retire during favorable political conditions.Daniel Urman, a law professor at Northeastern University, told Newsweek that while it's impossible to predict exactly when a justice might step down, Justices Alito and Thomas are the most likely candidates for retirement—primarily to allow a like-minded successor to be appointed. However, he noted that this isn't a certainty, as both justices are now part of the majority after spending years as dissenting voices on the Court, a position they deeply value.Pressure from the right may not be convincing to the justices, he said."Judges and especially Justices are very independent, and I don't think they will be too influenced by the pressure campaign," he said. "It's ultimately a very personal decision and the Ginsburg example is important but she was older and faced more health issues than the current justices."None of the current justices on the court have publicly said they plan to retire anytime soon.Former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi told Newsweek Thomas could wait until after the 2026 midterms to avoid giving Democrats a motivating issue ahead of the elections."However, if that happens, President Trump will pick a very young and conservative nominee because in his mind, he got burned with Justice Barrett," he said. "And he wants to put his further imprint on the tenor of the High Court."Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek: "It's likely Trump appoints at least one Supreme Court Justice, and maybe two. The odds increase over his four-year term, especially with Justices Thomas and Alito being in their mid-70s.""Trump's Cabinet and officer appointees during his second term have been largely loyalists without the experience or independent streaks that frustrated him during his first term. His Supreme Court appointment(s) will likely reflect those same values, especially given the importance of the judiciary in standing in the way of his executive orders."Stephen Wermiel, a constitutional law professor at American University, told Newsweek, "It's uncertain whether Trump will have another Supreme Court vacancy. But there's a good chance conservatives will begin urging Roberts, Thomas, and Alito to retire after this term so Trump could install younger, like-minded justices.'Legal analysts believe Trump may prioritize personal loyalty over ideological alignment when choosing future Supreme Court nominees.Barbara McQuade, a former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek that frustration with decisions made by Justices Barrett and Roberts may drive Trump to look for candidates who are not only conservative but personally loyal to him."Trump could seek justices who won't break from him on major rulings," McQuade said. "That could have a major impact on upcoming cases dealing with birthright citizenship, transgender healthcare, and the limits of executive power."Justice Amy Coney Barrett has occasionally sided against Trump's positions, including a ruling against deporting alleged gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Her independent stance has drawn criticism from Trump-aligned conservatives.Political analyst Urman agreed that loyalty may guide Trump's future selections, noting that he 'appears to value loyalty above all else in his nominees.' Any new appointments, Urman added, would likely align more closely with the judicial philosophies of Justices Thomas or Alito than Barrett.
Hashtags

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


The Hindu
21 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Mediation between two unequals not possible: Shashi Tharoor on Trump's claims
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has said that to suggest one can mediate between two unequals is not possible because there is no equivalence between terrorists and their victims, amid repeated claims by U.S. President Donald Trump that he "helped settle" the tensions between India and Pakistan. Mr. Tharoor, currently in the U.S. leading a multi-party delegation on Operation Sindoor, made the comments in response to a question during a conversation at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on Thursday. "…Mediation is not a term that we are particularly willing to entertain. I'll tell you why not. The fact is that this implies, even when you say things like broker or whatever, you're implying an equivalence which simply doesn't exist," Mr. Tharoor said. He said there is no equivalence between terrorists and their victims. "There is no equivalence between a country that provides safe haven to terrorism, and a country that's a flourishing multi-party democracy that's trying to get on with its business," he said. "There is no equivalence between a state that is a status quo power that just wants to be left alone by its neighbours, where the neighbours don't agree with us, and a revisionist power that wants to upset the geopolitical arrangements that have existed for the last three-quarters of a century. There is no equivalence possible in these cases, and in these circumstances, to suggest that you can mediate between two unequals is not possible,' Mr. Tharoor added. Since May 10, when Mr. Trump announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a 'full and immediate' ceasefire after a 'long night' of talks mediated by Washington, he has repeated his claim over a dozen times that he 'helped settle' the tensions between India and Pakistan. He has also claimed that he told the nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours that America would do a 'lot of trade' with them if they stopped the conflict. On being asked how he would characterise the American role in the conflict, Mr. Tharoor said he is "guessing to some degree' that the American role would have been first of all to keep themselves informed, conversations on both sides, and 'certainly my government received a number of calls at high levels from the U.S. government, and we appreciated their concern and their interest.' He said that at the same time, the U.S. must have been making similar calls at the highest levels to the Pakistan side, and 'our assumption is that's where, because that's the side that needed persuading to stop this process, that may well have been where their messages really had the greatest effect. But that's guesswork on my part. I don't know what they said to the Pakistanis.' Mr. Trump repeated the claim as recently as Thursday when during a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in the Oval Office, the U.S. President said that he is 'very proud" that he was able to stop the conflict between nuclear powers India and Pakistan. 'I spoke to some very talented people on both sides, very good people on both sides' and said that Washington will not do any trade deals with either 'if you are going to go shooting each other and whipping out nuclear weapons that may be even affect us. Because you know that nuclear dust blows across oceans very quickly, it affects us," Mr. Trump said. 'You know what, I got that war am I going to get credit? I'm not going to get credit for anything. They don't give me credit for anything. But nobody else could have done it. I stopped it. I was very proud of that,' Mr. Trump added. About two weeks after the horrific April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir in which 26 civilians were killed, India launched Operation Sindoor targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir on May 7. India and Pakistan reached an understanding on May 10 to end the conflict after four days of intense cross-border drone and missile strikes. India has been maintaining that the understanding on cessation of hostilities with Pakistan was reached following direct talks between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two militaries.

The Hindu
21 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Deadly Russian bombardment of Ukraine further dampens hopes for peace
Russia struck Ukraine with a thunderous aerial bombardment overnight, further dampening hopes that the warring sides could reach a peace deal anytime soon, days after Kyiv embarrassed the Kremlin with a surprising drone attack on military airfields deep inside Russia. The barrage was one of the fiercest of the three-year war, lasting several hours, striking six Ukrainian territories, and killing at least six people and injuring about 80 others, Ukrainian officials said Friday. Among the dead were three emergency responders in Kyiv, one person in Lutsk and two people in Chernihiv. The attack came after U.S. President Donald Trump said his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, told him Moscow would respond to Ukraine's attack Sunday on Russian military airfields. It was also hours after Mr. Trump said it might be better to let Ukraine and Russia 'fight for a while' before pulling them apart and pursuing peace. Trump's comments were a remarkable detour from his often-stated appeals to stop the war and signaled he may be giving up on recent peace efforts. Ukrainian cities have come under regular bombardment since Russia invaded its neighbour in February 2022. The attacks have killed more than 12,000 civilians, according to the United Nations. 'Russia doesn`t change its stripes,' Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. Also Read | Zelenskyy slams Russia after three generations killed in drone strike The war has continued unabated even as a U.S.-led diplomatic push for a settlement has brought two rounds of direct peace talks between delegations from Russia and Ukraine. The negotiations delivered no significant breakthroughs, however, and the sides remain far apart on their terms for an end to the fighting. Ukraine has offered an unconditional 30-day ceasefire and a meeting between Mr. Zelenskyy and Russian leader Vladimir Putin to break the deadlock. But the Kremlin has effectively rejected a truce and hasn't budged from its demands. 'The Kremlin continues efforts to falsely portray Russia as willing to engage in good-faith negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, despite Russia's repeated refusal to offer any concessions,' the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, said late Thursday. Further peace talks between Russia and Ukraine are expected in coming weeks, as is another exchange of prisoners of war. The attack involved 407 Russian drones and 44 ballistic and cruise missiles, Ukrainian air force spokesperson Yurii Ihnat said. Ukrainian forces said they shot down about 30 of the cruise missiles and up to 200 of the drones. The Kyiv emergency workers were killed while responding to the strikes. 'They were working under fire to help people,' the Interior Ministry said in a statement. Russia's Defense Ministry said it aimed at Ukrainian military targets with 'long-range precision weapons' and successfully struck arms depots, drone factories and repair facilities, among other targets. But fitting a pattern for Russian attacks throughout the war, Friday's bombardment also struck apartment buildings and other non-military targets, Associated Press reporters observed. In Kyiv, explosions were heard for hours as falling drone debris sparked fires across several districts, said Tymur Tkachenko, head of the Kyiv City Administration. He urged people to seek shelter. Vitalina Vasylchenko, a 14-year-old Kyiv resident, sheltered in a parking garage with her 6-year-old sister and their mother after an explosion blew one of their windows off its hinges. 'I heard a buzzing sound, then my dad ran to me and covered me with his hand," she said. "Then there was a very loud explosion. My whole life flashed before my eyes — I already thought that was it. I started having a panic attack. ... I'm shocked that I'm alive.' In Kyiv's Solomyanskyi district, a fire broke out on the 11th floor of a 16-story apartment building. Emergency services evacuated three people from the burning unit. The attack caused a blackout in some areas, and more than 2,000 households on Kyiv's eastern bank were without power, city officials said. Elsewhere, 10 people were injured by an aerial attack on the western city of Ternopil, regional governor Viacheslav Nehoda said. The strike damaged industrial and infrastructure facilities, left parts of the city without electricity, and disrupted water supplies. Russia also targeted the western Lviv and Khmelnytskyi regions, the northern Chernihiv region, and the central Poltava region, where at least three people were injured. In Russia, air defenses shot down 10 Ukrainian drones heading toward the capital early Friday, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said. As a precaution, flights at Moscow airports were temporarily suspended overnight Thursday into Friday and then again late Friday afternoon. Ukrainian drones also targeted three other regions of Russia, authorities said, damaging apartment buildings and industrial plants. Three people were injured, officials said. Russia's Defense Ministry said that air defenses downed 174 Ukrainian drones over 13 regions early Friday. It added that three Ukrainian Neptune missiles were also shot down over the Black Sea. Ukraine struck airfields and other military targets in Russia, such as fuel storage tanks and transport hubs, the Ukrainian General Staff said. Also, a locomotive derailed early Friday in the Belgorod region after the track was blown up, Belgorod Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov said. Russia has recently accused Ukraine of sabotaging the rail network.


Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
Elon Musk's daughter mocks father's feud with Trump: ‘Love being proven right'
Elon Musk's daughter appeared to mock her father's highly publicised feud with US President Donald Trump on Friday, expressing satisfaction over the situation on social media. Vivian Wilson, 21 — who previously vowed to leave the US after Trump's election — shared an Instagram post that hinted at amusement over the clash. The Instagram post of Elon Musk's daughter. 'I love being proven right,' she wrote, followed by uncontrollable laughter and a refusal to comment further, according to a report by the New York Post. The conflict between Musk and Trump escalated Thursday when Musk criticized one of Trump's policies, prompting Trump to question whether their relationship could ever be repaired. Trump said on Friday that Elon Musk had "lost his mind" but added that he was ready to move past their heated fallout. The dramatic rift between the world's richest man and the most powerful political figure has sparked concerns, carrying both political and economic implications. "Honestly I've been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk, I just wish him well," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to his New Jersey golf club late Friday, as reported by AFP. After Elon Musk slammed Trump's spending bill as an 'abomination' on Tuesday, the former president responded sharply from the Oval Office on Thursday, expressing he was 'very disappointed' in the billionaire entrepreneur. I love being proven right. The controversial bill is expected to face stiff resistance in Congress, as it significantly increases the U.S. deficit. Critics also warn that it could slash healthcare coverage for millions of low-income Americans. (With inputs from agencies) Key Takeaways Public feuds can have significant political and economic ramifications. Family dynamics can add complexity to high-profile conflicts. Social media serves as a platform for personal opinions on public matters.