President Donald Trump has announced he will nominate Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals judge in Washington DC, to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Now that Justice Anthony Kennedy has retired, President Trump owes it to us to continue keeping his promise to appoint justices in the mold of the late Antonin Scalia, a promise that likely got Trump elected.
If Kavanaugh’s views were adopted by other courts, then other frivolous claims attacking religion in the public square would have a better chance of being heard in federal courts.
If judges are a vindication of Trump, are they also a vindication of Mitch McConnell? And if so, does a good Supreme Court really compensate for a lousy Congress?
Ten particularly outstanding candidates from the list come to mind: five from the South; four from the Midwest; and one establishment pick from the Beltway.
This issue with Vitter’s confirmation comes as people on the Left are increasing pressure against hires if they’ve spoken against abortion or any non-hardline leftist views.
Kyle Duncan had nothing to do with John Thompson’s criminal case. Duncan also had nothing to do with the prosecutors who withheld evidence from Thompson’s attorneys.
We asked a wide range of conservative policy experts to grade President Trump on his first year in office. Across seven policy areas, Trump averaged a grade of B/B-.
We have divergent interpretive theories that map onto ideologically sorted parties, so is it any surprise that elections are high-stakes for judges?
Every four-year term, a president appoints around a fifth of the judiciary. They continue shaping our world long after the president who appointed them has left the White House.
The Senate Judiciary Committee interrogated two of the most qualified lawyers for the federal appeals courts not on their qualifications but on their identities.
This week, in an echo of the 21 contenders for the Supreme Court rolled out during the campaign, 11 would-be black-robers join last month’s stellar list of 10 lower-court nominees.
Eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees was the natural culmination of a tit-for-tat escalation by both parties. The brinksmanship is all symptomatic of a much larger problem.
Will these senators follow their own demands and vote on Neil Gorsuch? After all, only a few months ago they insisted senators must #DoYourJob.
As a matter of constitutional law, the Senate is fully within its powers to let the Supreme Court literally die out.
- Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test Proves She Was LyingActing as if the results of the senator's DNA test are continue reading >
- 10 Key Questions About The Khashoggi Affair To Answer Before Buying The Press NarrativeThe discipline shown in the messaging campaign against continue reading >
- Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton Finally Admitted Democrats Think It’s Okay To Cheat To WinEric Holder and Hillary Clinton have finally voiced thecontinue reading >