logo
Trump aims to build a MAGA judiciary, breaking with traditional conservatives

Trump aims to build a MAGA judiciary, breaking with traditional conservatives

Yahoo2 days ago

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is signaling a new approach to selecting judges in his second term, departing from his first-term formula of younger up-and-comers, elite credentials and pedigrees in traditional conservative ideology and instead leaning toward unapologetically combative, MAGA-friendly nominees.
The president turned heads last week by launching a searing attack on Leonard Leo and the conservative legal network known as the Federalist Society, which played a major role in selecting and steering 234 Trump-nominated judges, including three Supreme Court justices, through Senate confirmation during his first term.
Trump's transformation of the federal courts and the creation of 6-3 conservative Supreme Court majority, which led to the overturning of the landmark abortion rights case Roe v. Wade in 2022, was possibly his biggest achievement in his first term.
But Trump slammed Leo as a 'sleazebag' in late May after a panel of judges, including one he appointed, blocked some of his tariffs.
'I am so disappointed in the Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous judicial nominations,' he wrote on Truth Social.
Leo, who declined an interview request, praised Trump's first term judicial appointments, saying in a statement that they will be his 'most important legacy.'
Of Trump's early judicial nominees in his second term, much attention has been focused on his decision to tap Emil Bove, his former personal criminal defense lawyer and current Justice Department official, to serve on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
'What's different about him is that MAGA world is very excited about him because it sees him as someone who has been ruthlessly implementing the White House's wishes,' said Ed Whelan, a veteran conservative judicial nominations analyst who works at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
The president's early actions have raised warning signs among conservative lawyers who favor a nonpartisan judiciary.
'It's potentially a watershed moment in the relationship between Trump and the traditional conservative legal movement,' said Gregg Nunziata, former chief nominations counsel to Senate Republicans who now leads the Society for the Rule of Law, a group of right-leaning lawyers that has been critical of Trump. 'There are allies and advisers to the president who have been agitating for a different kind of judge — one more defined by loyalty to the president and advancing his agenda, rather than one more defined by conservative jurisprudence.'
Nunziata warned that the president is 'turning his back on' his first-term legacy of prioritizing conservative jurisprudence.
Trump's social media posts were welcomed by some conservatives who want a new approach to judicial nominations in his second term — including Mike Davis, another former Senate GOP chief counsel for nominations, who runs the conservative Article III Project advocacy group and offers his suggestions to the White House on judicial nominees.
Trump needs to avoid 'typical FedSoc elitists' who were 'too weak to speak out' on issues like what MAGA world perceives as lawfare against Trump during the Biden years, Davis said.
'We need to have evidence that these judicial nominees are going to be bold and fearless for the Constitution, and there were plenty of opportunities for them over the last five years to demonstrate that,' he added.
Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law who mixes in Federalist Society circles, said some federal judges may have concerns about stepping down if they are not convinced Trump will replace them with someone they consider to be qualified.
Certain judges, Adler said, want to be succeeded by 'someone that understands the judicial role, understands that their obligation is to follow the law and apply the law, as opposed to someone that is seen as a political hack and is going to rule in a particular way merely because that's what their team is supposed to want.'
Whelan said he has heard a sitting judge express such concerns.
"I recently heard from a conservative judge who has decided not to take senior status because of concerns over who would be picked as his or her successor," he said. He declined to name the judge.
During the first term, Leo played a key role in advising Trump on whom to pick. He helped come up with a list of potential Supreme Court nominees during the 2016 election, when some on the right were worried Trump would not pick a justice who was sufficiently conservative to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died earlier that year.
In Trump's second-term, the deputy White House counsel for nominations, Steve Kenny, has daily oversight of judicial nominations with input from chief of staff Susie Wiles, White House counsel David Warrington and Trump himself, among others. Like Davis, Kenny previously worked for Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
'In choosing these judges, we are looking for judges who are constitutionalists, who won't be judicial activists on the bench,' a senior White House official said. The administration is looking for judges whose judicial philosophy is similar to conservative Supreme Court justices such as Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, the official added.
Both are seen within MAGA world as more aligned with Trump than his own appointees to the court: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
Despite the alliance with Leo delivering achievements that many Senate Republicans take pride in, few were willing to jump to his defense in the wake of Trump's personal attack.
'I'm not going to get involved in those personality conflicts,' said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., another Judiciary Committee member, pleaded the Fifth: 'That's between Leonard and the president.'
But, he added, 'I like the Federalist Society.'
Grassley praised Trump's initial slate of nominees.
'Republicans remain laser-focused on putting strong conservatives on the federal bench,' he said. 'President Trump's first five judicial nominees, who all came before the Judiciary Committee this week, are high-caliber legal minds who will faithfully defend the Constitution and serve the American people well.'
Despite the first-term success, there were already indications once Trump was re-elected that his second-term approach to judicial nominations would differ. Leo is no longer advising Trump, and both the president and his allies have been sharply critical of judges who have ruled against the administration in its early months over its aggressive use of executive power.
Barrett has been one target, as have some lower court judges.
'Federalist Society lawyers are very bright. They're very intellectual, kind of the academic side of the law. This Trump White House is looking for more practical judges,' said a senior Republican lawyer close to the White House.
'A second element is there are some decisions that have been made by Amy Coney Barrett, in particular, that really disappointed the Trump administration, and Trump people more broadly, and that has filtered down to some of these lower court decisions," the lawyer added.
For Democrats, Trump's public break with the Federalist Society — along with another move to refuse to cooperate with the American Bar Association, which traditionally provides recommendations on judicial nominees — are part of the same trend.
"They don't want anyone looking over the shoulders of nominees to find out what they believe, what they've said and what they've done," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday during the first hearing for Trump's new wave of nominees.
So far, Trump has announced two nominees to the influential federal appeals courts, as well as nine district court nominees. In addition to Bove, the other appeals court nominee is Whitney Hermandorfer, who has been tapped for a seat on the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
While Bove is not viewed as the type of nominee Leo might suggest, Hermandorfer is seen as a traditional Federalist Society pick. She served as a law clerk for Barrett and Alito, as well as for Kavanaugh when he was an appeals court judge. Hermandorfer has also been involved in some culture war litigation while serving under Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti.
She is 'very much in the Trump 1.0 Federalist Society mode,' said Russell Wheeler, a scholar at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution who tracks judicial nominations.
Five of Trump's district court nominees are from Florida, and four are from Missouri.
Hermandorfer, joined by the Missouri nominees. appeared at the confirmation hearing Wednesday where she said her job would not be to do the president's bidding.
"That would not be my role. My role would be to carry out my oath,' she said. Hermandorfer called the Federalist Society, of which she is a member, a "wonderful place" to discuss issues with other lawyers.
According to the federal judiciary, there are 49 pending vacancies, with only three of them on the appeals courts. Another three have announced plans to step down.
The Republican lawyer close to the White House said it is a little early to know how different Trump's second-term picks will be from the first because the president got off to a slow start in nominating his first batch of judges.
Trump may struggle to match the numbers of his first term, in part because this time around there are not as many vacancies as there were in 2017. Then, Trump benefited from a Republican Senate that blocked many of President Barack Obama's picks, including his nominee to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland.
Legal activists tend to focus more on federal appeals court nominees than district court nominees because they have more power to change the law and are often more likely to be tipped for potential slots on the Supreme Court.
There are currently 24 Republican-appointed appeals court judges in total who are eligible for retirement, according to Wheeler. Generally, judges are more likely to step down when a president of the same party who appointed them is in office.
Even if Trump wants to depart from the Leo playbook, he will find it difficult to find qualified conservative lawyers who do not have some links with the Federalist Society, Whelan said.
'If you are looking for talented lawyers with the sort of experience that would make them good judges, most of the people you are looking at are going to be Federalist Society types,' he added.
Kenny, for example, who holds daily oversight over nominations at the White House, 'is definitely a proud member of the Federalist Society,' the lawyer said. 'But he's also going to follow the administration's lead on the kinds of judges they want.'
Nunziata said it's up to GOP senators to push back on nominees like Bove, warning that acquiescing would send a signal to Trump that he has a 'free hand' to nominate more individuals like him, including to a possible Supreme Court vacancy.
'I hope there will be pushback. Time will tell,' he said, citing former Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell's key role in steering Trump's first-term judicial nominees. 'I would expect him to be alarmed by this turn and to fight against it with his remaining time in the Senate.'
McConnell's office declined to comment.
Democrats say that with nominees like Bove, Trump is making it more explicit that he simply wants loyalists.
'He's putting in all the people that will support him, or have a relationship to him,' Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said. 'That's what it's all about for the president. … He just wants people who will support what he wants.'
But when asked if she believes Republicans will stand up to some of Trump's judicial nominees, Hirono responded wryly.
'Of course not,' she said.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know
Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know

In February, President Donald Trump said he was considering a plan to pay out $5,000 stimulus checks to American taxpayers from the savings identified by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Are they happening? No official plan or schedule for such a payout has been released, and a decision on the checks would have to come from Congress, which has so far been cool to the idea. And there have been questions as to how much DOGE has actually saved. The idea was floated by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback, who suggested on Musk's social media platform X that Trump and Musk should "should announce a 'DOGE Dividend'" from the money saved from reductions in government waste and workforce since it was American taxpayer money in the first place. He even submitted a proposal for how it would work, with a timeline for after the expiration of DOGE in July 2026. "At $2 trillion in DOGE savings and 78 million tax-paying households, this is a $5,000 refund per household, with the remaining used to pay down the national debt," he said in a separate post. Musk replied, "Will check with the President." "We're considering giving 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% to paying down the debt," Trump said in a during the Saudi-sponsored FII PRIORITY Summit in Miami Beach the same month. DOGE has dismantled entire federal agencies, wiped out government contracts and led the firings of tens of thousands of federal workers, leaving many agencies struggling to continue operations. DOGE checks? Elon Musk dodges DOGE stimulus check question during Wisconsin rally: Here's what he said. Fishbeck suggested that the potential refund go only to households that are net-income taxpayers, or households that pay more in taxes than they get back. The Pew Research Center said that most Americans with an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax. They would not be eligible. If DOGE achieves Musk's initial goal of stripping $2 trillion from U.S. government spending by 2026, Fishback's plan was for $5,000 per household, or 20% of the savings divided by the number of eligible households. If DOGE doesn't hit the goal, Fishback said the amount should be adjusted accordingly. 'So again, if the savings are only $1 trillion, which I think is awfully low, the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500,' Fishback said during a podcast appearance. 'If the savings are only $500 billion, which, again, is really, really low, then the [checks] are only $1,250.' However, while Musk talked about saving $2 trillion in federal spending during Trump's campaign, he lowered the goal to $1 trillion after Trump assumed office and said in March he was on pace to hit that goal by the end of May. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk lowered the projected savings further to $150 billion in fiscal year 2026. Musk left the White House at the end of May when his designation as a "special government employee" ended. DOGE, the advisory group he created, is expected to continue without him. That depends on who you ask. On its website, DOGE claims to have saved an estimated $175 billion as of May 30, "a combination of asset sales, contract and lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletions, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions." The site says that works out to $1,086.96 saved per taxpayer. However, many of DOGE's claims have been exaggerated and several of the initiatives to slash agency workforces have been challenged in court. DOGE has been accused of taking credit for contracts that were canceled before DOGE was created, failing to factor in funds the government is required to pay even if a contract is canceled, and tallying every contract by the most that could possibly be spent on it even when nothing near that amount had been obligated. The website list has been changed as the media pointed out errors, such as a claim that an $8 million savings was actually $8 billion. On May 30, CNN reported that one of its reporters found that less than half the $175 billion figure was backed up with even basic documentation, making verification difficult if not impossible. Some of the changes may also end up costing taxpayers more, such as proposed slashes to the Internal Revenue Service that experts say would mean less tax revenue generated, resulting in a net cost of about $6.8 billion. Over the next 10 years, if IRS staffing stays low, the cumulative cost in uncollected taxes would hit $159 billion, according to the nonpartisan Budget Lab at Yale University. The per-taxpayer claim on the website is also inflated, CNN said, as it's based on '161 million individual federal taxpayers' and doesn't seem to include married people filing jointly. This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: DOGE dividends: Will American taxpayers get a $5,000 check?

Primary election 2025: Berks officials certify election results
Primary election 2025: Berks officials certify election results

Yahoo

time31 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Primary election 2025: Berks officials certify election results

Berks County election officials have finalized the tally of results from the primary election. During a special meeting Friday, the elections board voted unanimously to certify the vote totals and authorize the submission of the results to the secretary of the commonwealth. There is now a clear picture of which Democratic and Republican candidates will be on the November ballot for municipal, school, county and judicial races. In addition to those candidates who appeared on the primary ballot, nearly 100 candidates were added to the fall election through successful write-in campaigns. Independent and third-party candidates still have a chance to petition to be on the ballot before the lineup is finalized. Elections Director Anne Norton told the elections board that her term performed the required reviews and audits of the May 20 primary, finding no variations or discrepancies with the official tally. The official results of the election will be posted on the county elections website. Overall, just over 21% of registered Democrats and Republicans voted. Voter turnout was slightly lower than recent, similar elections. In the 2023 municipal primary, for example, turnout was about 24%. The elections board thanked the election services team as well as those who worked the polls and handled mail ballots for the hard work and long hours they put into making sure every vote was counted. 'A huge thank you to everyone involved,' Commissioner Michael Rivera said. Commissioner Dante Santoni Jr. also commended those who ran to represent their fellow residents in local positions. 'When you run for office it takes time away from other things,' he said. 'You stick your neck out for your community at all levels of government and I give kudos to everyone who participated in the democratic process.'

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

Hamilton Spectator

time34 minutes ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term

WASHINGTON (AP) — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs , deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations , Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act , to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort , forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store