A Bipartisan Election Scandal for a Former Liberal Darling

Generally the first defense of any Secretary of State or chief election official caught in a scandal is to claim partisanship. And Kentucky’s Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes has quite a scandal on her hands. Secretary Grimes was a darling of MSNBC for her Senate run against Mitch McConnell a few year back. Yet, it is her day job as Secretary of State that is getting her in trouble with both sides of the aisle.

In a nine-page letter to the Kentucky State Board of Elections, State Board of Elections Executive Director Jared Dearing, wrote:

Dearing, a Democrat, said in his letter that since he took the position last year either Grimes or her assistants have asked him and Scutchfield to do things, "we have found to be inappropriate, unethical and potentially illegal."

Among those unethical things are to ignore a consent decree which required Grimes’ office to clean up Kentucky’s voter rolls:

Dearing said in his letter, which he provided to the Courier Journal on Monday, that after about 100,000 postcards were returned he was ordered to stop scanning them by Grimes' staff. He said they were told to "slow walk" the process after he and Scutchfield raised concerns about disobeying the federal court order.

She also may have improperly used the voter registration systems to view employees' voting history and affiliation.  In other words, she may have been trying to hire for career and merit-based positions only Democrats and not Green, Libertarian or Republican Party affiliated voters. 

And yet another frightening example: she picked poll watchers (which are almost always selected by parties to watch over election officials):

Dearing also said Grimes has given her office the ability to recruit and place poll workers across the state, a task previously handled by county-level political parties and boards of elections, and was given the names and addresses of all 15,000 poll workers in order to send them a thank you letter prior to a contentious election. Previous secretaries of state were not given that information. 

“The legislators who created the laws that govern our elections placed a system of checks and balances that would allow no one individual or one political party to have an unfair advantage within the system,” Dearing wrote. “During Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes’ term in office, many of these checks have been slowly chipped away.”

These allegations mirror those of the former Republican Executive Director last year:

Last October, the former assistant executive director of the State Board of Elections, Matt Selph, filed a whistleblower lawsuit accusing Grimes of many of the same issues raised by Dearing.

The complaint filed by Selph, a Republican, and the letter sent by Dearing are both rooted in allegations that Grimes has improper access to the state’s voter registration system. Dearing alleged that Grimes’s staff was using the database to look up the voting records of elections board staffers and job candidates.

How many Executive Directors of both parties have to accuse Grimes before people start believing the allegations?  All sides, Democrat or Republican, Green or Libertarian, should agree that Grimes needs to go.    

ICYMI: Majority Leader McConnell Defends Judge Kavanaugh From Vicious Democrat Attacks

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell spoke from the Senate floor yesterday regarding the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. McConnell not only explained his personal views as to why Judge Kavanaugh is ‘uniquely qualified, and a brilliant legal mind’ but the Majority Leader also shared similar sentiments from a number of his Senate colleagues.

Unfortunately, Majority Leader McConnell was also forced to address the loud minority of senators who have expressed unhinged opposition to President Trump’s nominee. Speaker McConnell said this,

Here is how the junior Senator from New Jersey [Cory Booker] characterized this nomination with the senior Senator from Massachusetts [Elizabeth Warren] right beside him.  And here's what he said: “We are walking through the valley of the shadow of death. You are either complicit in the evil, you are either contributing to the wrong, or you are fighting against."

This, from a member of the Judiciary Committee. He has not even met with Judge Kavanaugh.  He hasn't heard a word of testimony and he is citing Scripture to proclaim that this nominee is pure evil of biblical proportions. He is claiming that the Senators and the American people who have an open mind on this nomination are complicit in the evil. This is truly outrageous and not a single Democrat has come forward to condemn what he had to say. 

Leader McConnell brings up an important point that speaks to the radical commentary from Democrat leaders. While Republicans have in the past opposed the nominees of Democrat presidents, not once has a Republican Senator called a Supreme Court pick ‘evil.’ Perhaps even more disillusioned was what California Senator Kamala Harris said of the pick,

The junior Senator from California [Kamala Harris], another member of the Judiciary Committee, said Judge Kavanaugh would bring a . . . “destruction of the U.S. Constitution.” She made up her mind before there was even a nominee.

Leader McConnell brings up specific instances of extremist rhetoric coming from important leaders of the Democrat Party. Instead of scrutinizing Judge Kavanaugh in an unbiased and open-minded manner, Senate Democrats have resorted to petty political tactics and extreme commentary to bash a longtime public servant’s character. To continue to be the greatest nation in the world with the most fair legal system, this practice of hyper-partisanship from the left must end.

Schumer's Delaying Game on Judge Kavanaugh Will Fail

Democrats have not found a way to substantively oppose Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. So they are switching gears to delaying his confirmation to the Court until after October 1 when the new term starts. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has led an effort to stop Democrats from meeting with Kavanaugh:

Senate Democrats are largely giving Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh the brushoff, refusing the customary “courtesy visits” until Republicans agree to turn over voluminous documents from the Supreme Court nominee’s past.

In the two weeks since President Trump nominated him to succeed the retiring Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Judge Kavanaugh has met with 23 Republicans, and not a single Democrat. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said in an interview Monday that he would not meet with Judge Kavanaugh until the top Republican and the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee reach agreement on what documents should be produced. . . .

“I have told my caucus that I’m waiting, and I think most of them are following me,” Mr. Schumer said.

Of course, Schumer’s wall is already cracking.  Senator Manchin of West Virginia has just agreed to meet with Kavanaugh:

Sen. Joe Manchin’s one-on-one meeting with SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh is officially on the books for July 30.

— Phil Mattingly (@Phil_Mattingly) July 23, 2018

The stated reason for the delay is a ridiculous effort to get irrelevant documents from Kavanaugh’s time as Staff Secretary to President George W. Bush. These records are irrelevant as Kavanaugh has a long record as a judge to examine to decide how one will vote on him. Instead Democrats are focusing on irrelevant documents in an effort to delay. Senator Grassley in a tweet explained it well:

Kagan’s prez library docs were necessary to gain insight because she had ZERO experience as a judge and @SenJudiciary wasn’t fully provided Kagan’s SG records. On the contrary, the best indication of Judge Kavanaugh’s jurisprudence is his TWELVE years as a DC Circuit Court Judge.

— Senate Judiciary (@senjudiciary) July 24, 2018

Fortunately the Senate Majority Leader is Mitch McConnell not Chuck Schumer.  Leader McConnell won’t tolerate too much of this. 

McConnell on Democrats demanding Kavanaugh documents: I hope we can reach an agreement..We’re going to finish this nomination..There is no delaying tactic to take us past October 1

— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 24, 2018

Thank you, Leader McConnell. 

ICYMI: Leader McConnell on Kavanaugh's Credentials and Democrats' Attacks

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wrote an excellent op-ed last week on Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Democratic obstruction of the confirmation process, and liberals' fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the courts.  He describes Judge Kavanaugh's sterling credentials and strong judicial record:

Judge Kavanaugh possesses the qualities and qualifications that the American people deserve in a Supreme Court justice. He has outstanding academic credentials, with undergraduate and law degrees from Yale, and over a decade of experience on the nation’s most consequential federal appellate court, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. He possesses an exceptional legal mind and an even-handed temperament. And his record reflects a clear understanding of a judge’s role in our republic: Not to make policy or impose personal preferences, but to begin with the facts of each case and interpret our laws as they’re written. 

He also recounts the left's "unhinged attacks" on Judge Kavanaugh, saying that the American people will not be fooled: 

It would be too optimistic to suggest Judge Kavanaugh’s experience, reputation, education and virtues will earn him a fair hearing from the far left. Extreme voices have tried the same partisan playbook against Republican presidents’ Supreme Court nominees for more than 40 years. In 1975, they insisted that John Paul Stevens lacked impartiality and opposed women’s rights. In 1987, they called then-Judge Anthony Kennedy "sexist" and "a disaster for women." In 1990, they said that a Justice David Souter might "undo the advances made by women, minorities, dissenters, and other disadvantaged groups." . . . But fact-checkers are already exposing the egregious misrepresentations of Judge Kavanaugh’s record. And the far left failed the laugh test from the very beginning by spinning apocalyptic predictions about this nomination before it even existed. . . .

And Leader McConnell skillfully explains how the left's apoplexy over Judge Kavanaugh's respect for the rule of law is fueled by their desire to use the courts to achieve their progressive policy goals that would not be able to be passed by the people's representatives in the legislature because they are too radical: 

This is antithetical to the design of our democracy. The rule of law requires a sharp distinction between judicial and political offices. We need unbiased and open-minded judges who treat all parties fairly, whose decisions turn on the facts of each case and the texts of the laws that it is their job to interpret.  

That’s the kind of judge the American people deserve. It’s the kind of judge they expected to receive after then-candidate Donald Trump put forward the transparent process he’d use to select Supreme Court nominees. And it’s precisely who Judge Kavanaugh’s record demonstrates that he is.

Thanks to the leadership of Leader McConnell and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, Judge Kavanaugh will receive a hearing and consideration before the Senate, despite the Democrats' scare and delay tactics and the fact-less attacks by radically liberal organizations.  Judge Kavanaugh is the example of the type of judge that should sit throughout our judicial system and the type of judge that President Trump has appointed: one who respects the limited role of the courts in our system of the separation of powers and who decides cases based on the law and the facts, not on the basis of preferred policy outcomes. 

A Needed Policy Change to Eliminate Bias at the IRS

In the past, conservative groups had to disclose sensitive information to the bureaucratic and often biased organization that is the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Fox News reports that thanks to a recent policy change, that is no longer the case.

The Trump administration is lifting requirements that some tax-exempt groups disclose the identities of their donors to federal tax authorities. The change benefits groups that spend millions of dollars on political ads, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an organization tied to the billionaire Koch brothers.

This major announcement will bring a needed change of privacy to an organization that has historically discriminated against conservatives and right-leaning organizations.

Under the new guidance, social-welfare groups and other tax-exempt organizations, besides charitable and political organizations, will no longer have to provide the IRS with the names and addresses of donors. The groups will still have to keep donor information in their own records and make it available for the IRS when the agency needs the information in audits of taxpayers.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praised the change on the Senate floor yesterday:

Last night, the Internal Revenue Service made an important announcement. It’s particularly welcome news to those of us who are intently focused on defending the First Amendment, for those of us who raised concerns during the last administration about activist regulators punishing free speech and free association. And it’s a straightforward, commonsense policy decision. . . . 

It raises the question: If the IRS isn’t permitted to do anything with this set of Americans’ private information, why collect it in the first place? Unfortunately, we know exactly what happens when the government stockpiles private data about the donations through which Americans participate in the public discourse. We know exactly why many on the left are keen for bureaucrats to have this confidential information. Where it leads, is Americans being bullied – bullied -- for exercising their First Amendment rights. . . . 

So I welcome this announcement, and applaud the leadership of Secretary Mnuchin and Acting IRS Commissioner David Kautter. I’m glad that this step will make the right of Americans to freely advocate for their strongly-held beliefs less vulnerable to the malice of some in government, and to the proven failures of bureaucracies. And I urge continued vigilance for all of us who cherish our First Amendment.

Conservative groups have long been calling for a policy proposal like this one to take place, even coming together to write a letter to President Trump. The New York Times reports,

Americans for Prosperity and other 501(c)(4) organizations in the Koch brothers’ network of advocacy groups were among dozens of such nonprofit groups to sign onto a letter sent in May to Mr. Trump and Mr. Mnuchin declaring a policy change “an issue of utmost importance.” The letter accused the I.R.S. of “targeting of nonprofit organizations on the basis of ideology.”

Officials with the Treasury Department largely echoed that reasoning, explaining that the move was driven in part by the I.R.S.’s inappropriate targeting of political groups during the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

The RNLA welcomes this new policy change as private organizations should never face government discrimination for their political beliefs. This proposal serves as one more safeguard against potential abuse.

Justice Anthony Kennedy Retires From The Supreme Court

In what turned out to be one of the most important days in American history, Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his resignation from the Bench after more than thirty years of service. The 1987 appointee of President Ronald Reagan hand delivered President Donald Trump a resignation letter that stated: 

My dear Mr. President,   

This letter is a respectful and formal notification of my decision, effective July 31 of this year, to end my regular active status as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, while continuing to serve in a senior status, as provided in 28 U.S.C 371 (b). 

For a member of the legal profession it is the highest of honors to serve on this Court. Please permit me by this letter to express my profound gratitude for having had the privilege to seek in each case how best to know, interpret, and defend the Constitution and the laws that must always conform to its mandates and promises. 

Respectfully and sincerely,  

Anthony Kennedy

The RNLA immediately issued the following press release:

The Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) honors Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who announced his retirement from the Supreme Court today. In his over 30 years on the Court, he has written some of the most seminal opinions in modern jurisprudence, and he will be remembered as one of the most important Supreme Court justices in American history. 

Justice Kennedy’s retirement leaves an important vacancy on the Supreme Court, and President Donald Trump will now have the opportunity to nominate a new Supreme Court justice from his superb list of potential Supreme Court nominees who respect the text of the Constitution and the role of the Court. While Senate Democrats have obstructed and delayed President Trump’s judicial nominees whenever possible, we trust that President Trump’s nominee will be vetted and confirmed due to the strong leadership of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. 

RNLA President Elliot Berke stated: “Since he was appointed by President Reagan in his second term, Justice Kennedy has been an important voice on the Court. We wish him nothing but the best in retirement. President Trump has mentioned many excellent candidates to replace Justice Kennedy, and we urge the Senate to not play politics but consider his nominee in as expedient a manner as possible.” 

RNLA Chair John Ryder agreed: “Justice Kennedy has been a champion of First Amendment rights from political speech to the free exercise of religion. His voice and views have made a great contribution to our understanding of the Constitution."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praised Justice Kennedy, particularly for his work in defending the First Amendment:

I want to express gratitude for the extraordinary service that Justice Kennedy has offered our nation. We owe him a debt of thanks for his ardent defense of the First Amendment right to political speech. #SCOTUS

— Leader McConnell (@SenateMajLdr) June 27, 2018

Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley said this of Justice Kennedy's tenure:

I thank Justice Kennedy for his decades of service to the law, to our republic + to the American ppl Our country owes him a debt of gratitude

— ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) June 27, 2018

The RNLA has a panel of legal experts available to discuss the retirement and the process for replacing Justice Kennedy. 

The RNLA will update this blog post as additional news comes out.

Last updated: June 27, 2018 at 5:00pm.

Senate Democrat Obstruction: Canceled August Recess & Low Overall Confirmation Rate

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced this afternoon the Senate's August recess has been cancelled due to the historic obstruction efforts from Senate Democrats. Leader McConnell's statement: 

Due to the historic obstruction by Senate Democrats of the president’s nominees, and the goal of passing appropriations bills prior to the end of the fiscal year, the August recess has been canceled. Senators should expect to remain in session in August to pass legislation, including appropriations bills, and to make additional progress on the president’s nominees.

Background: It is expected that Senators will have a state work period during the first full week in August before returning for the rest of the month. 

Earlier this week, on Saturday, June 2nd, President Trump said in his weekly address to the public that the Democratic resistance movement is “resisting the will of the American voter.” According the White House, when compared with recent presidents, President Trump has had the fewest nominees confirmed to date.

PolitiFact found that President Trump has also had the smallest percentage of nominees confirmed as of March 16th with only 57 percent of Trump’s nominees having been confirmed, below that of Presidents Barack Obama (67 percent), George W. Bush (78 percent), Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush (each with 81 percent).

President Trump explained:

From day one, Senate Democrats have shamelessly obstructed, stalled, and filibustered the confirmations of hundreds of talented men and women who are eager to come to Washington, D.C. to make a difference. They want to serve our country.

My nominees face a longer average confirmation wait than any in the history of our country. Today, more than 300 of our nominees are still awaiting a vote.

Last June, I nominated Isabel Patelunas to serve as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Intelligence and Analysis. Now, almost a year later, this tremendously qualified professional with nearly three decades of intelligence experience is still awaiting confirmation. She’s given up so much. She’s left areas. She’s moved from homes and she’s still not confirmed. It’s a disgrace.

Senate Republicans are fighting back against this Democrat obstructionism, too. Chairman Chuck Grassley of the Senate Judiciary Committee stated on Friday the Senate should work into the August recess to help confirm judicial nominations. Chairman Grassley is also calling for ‘filibuster Fridays’ to speed up the confirmation process. Additional work days on Capitol Hill could help fill the vacant positions, but the true shame here is that the Democrat leadership is intent on playing partisan politics even if it harms the function of government and ultimately the American people.

President Trump has nominated many excellent nominees to lead our government and to become federal judges. The RNLA thanks Leader McConnell and Chairman Grassley for their leadership and initiative to confirm President Trump’s backlog of nominees pending before the Senate.

Trump Judges: By the Numbers

Under the leadership of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, President Trump's well qualified judicial nominees are slowly, but surely, getting confirmed despite obstructionist Senate Democrats. In this post, we wanted to provide a brief recap of the current judicial landscape.

According to Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, as of today (May 16, 2018):

• There are 147 federal judicial vacancies out of 890 authorized federal judgeships.
• These vacancies include 15 circuit court vacancies and 124 district court vacancies.
• Of them, 72, or nearly half, are deemed "judicial emergencies."

So far, during the Trump Administration: 

• The White House has 73 judicial nominations currently pending at various stages in the Senate.
• Since President Trump has taken office, the Senate has confirmed: 1 Supreme Court justice, 21 circuit court judges, and 17 district judges (note: link is missing the two most recent circuit court judge confirmation from earlier this week (Carson & Nalbandian).

In the Senate, currently:

• Per Ed Whelan in National Review: 1 circuit judicial nominee is pending on the Senate floor, 2 nominees are waiting to be reported out of committee, and 7 are awaiting a confirmation hearing.
• As for district court nominees: 32 nominees are pending on the Senate floor and 40 nominees are pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats' obstruction tactics have slowed the process:

• On average, it has taken 84 days to confirm a Trump nominee (both judicial and executive positions); which is longer than it did under Obama, G.W. Bush, Clinton, or G.H.W. Bush, according to the Partnership for Public Service.
• Senate Democrats are using Senate procedures to delay confirmation votes, routinely forcing cloture votes and 30-hour post-cloture debate time. At this rate, it would take President Trump more than 9 years to confirm all his nominees.

The RNLA will continue to regularly highlight and keep our members posted on developments in the Senate related to judicial nominations and confirmations.

Circuit Judge Week: Bounds Hearing Complete, Engelhardt Confirmed & Cloture Filed in Brennan Nomination

As we highlighted earlier this week, this is an important week for many of President Trump's judicial nominees, especially circuit court nominees. Several noteworthy events happened today.


Ryan Bounds
Today, Ryan Bounds, nominated to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals back in September 2017, finally had his Senate confirmation hearing (which can be viewed here). Bounds did very well and answered all the questions posed to him. Nonetheless, the obstructionist Senate Democrats brought up two attack narratives which have been repeatedly debunked: some notion that Bounds was less than transparent in providing documents during his initial vetting and arguing that the blue slip tradition is being abandoned.

First, some Senate Democrats tried to claim that Bounds was less than transparent during the vetting process, citing articles he wrote in college that poked fun at political correctness and attempted to offer a commentary on problems he saw in his college community. Ironically, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon attempted to lead this attack, as could be seen on his Senate Floor speech yesterday (at about the 2:00:00 mark). However, as Ed Whelan points out, it was Wyden's own office that advised Bound to only go back through law school for pre-nomination vetting. So, not only is Wyden misleading in this attack, but Bounds followed the advice he sought from Wyden's Office. Further, once there was some question about these writings, Bounds provided these articles for review and further vetting.

Second, many Senate Democrats chose to argue the blue slips talking points again. Throughout the Bounds' hearing, a variety of Senate Democrats repeatedly attempted to bring up that the blue slip tradition has been abandoned or somehow modified. But it has not.

Following Bounds' hearing, Chairman Chuck Grassley delivered a speech on the Senate Floor highlighting the blue slip process under his chairmanship. He specifically noted (around the 3:41:00 mark):

[I]t is my prerogative to have the same blue slip policy as Chairman Biden and Kennedy and the vast majority of predecessors. Accordingly, I have said this, that negative or unreturned blue slips will not necessarily preclude the hearing for circuit court nominees unless the White House failed to consult with home state senators. And I get all sorts of information–I demand all sorts of information from the White House on this sort of consultation that's gone on. That is why I held hearings for David Stras, Kyle Duncan, Michael Brennan and Ryan Bounds despite the lack of two positive blue slips from home state senators. This policy is completely bipartisan. I've applied it to blue slips of Democratic and Republican senators. . . .

This speech is consistent with Chairman Grassley's explanation since the blue slip process became "controversial." Repeatedly, Chairman Grassley has explained how he will handle blue slips in his Judiciary Committee.


Kurt Engelhardt & Michael Brennan
On Senate Floor today, the Senate confirmed District Court Judge Kurt Engelhardt to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, with a vote of 62-34. 

The Senate also voted to invoke cloture regarding the nomination of Michael Brennan to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. As you may remember, Brennan is another nominee that the obstructionist Senate Democrats attempted to cry foul over the blue slip process. This will be another major vote to watch later this week.


We applaud and thank Leader Mitch McConnell and Chairman Chuck Grassley for their leadership in filling these important judicial vacancies and working to solve our judicial crisis. By filling these posts, the federal courts will run more efficiently and with less of a backlog caused by understaffed courts and overloaded dockets.

Big Week in Judicial Confirmations

This week is a busy and important one for judicial confirmations.  First, the Senate is taking confirmation votes on six excellent circuit court nominees: Michael B. Brennan (Seventh Circuit), Joel M. Carson (Tenth Circuit), Kurt D. Engelhardt (Fifth Circuit), John B. Nalbandian (Sixth Circuit), Michael Y. Scudder (Seventh Circuit), and Amy J. St. Eve (Seventh Circuit).  The Senate invoked cloture on Judge Engelhardt's nomination this evening, 64 to 31.

Majority Leader McConnell is threatening to hold the Senate in session through the weekend to ensure that these nominees are confirmed.  He said on the Senate floor earlier today:

This week, the Senate will consider another slate of extremely well-qualified nominees for seats on the federal bench. A thoughtful, independent, and expert judiciary is a cornerstone of our constitutional order. It’s been the case since the very beginning. 

Accordingly, the six circuit court nominees we’ll now consider have excellent reputations in the legal field, and have demonstrated they understand the proper role of federal judges in our government. First up is Kurt Engelhardt of Louisiana, the president’s choice to serve on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on Ryan Bounds (Ninth Circuit), J. Campbell Barker (Eastern District of Texas), Susan Brnovich (District of Arizona), Chad F. Kenney (Eastern District of Pennsylvania), Jeremy D. Kernodle (Eastern District of Texas), and Maureen K. Ohlhausen (Court of Federal Claims).  On Thursday, the Committee will meet to vote on the nominations of Mark Bennett (Ninth Circuit), Andrew Oldham (Fifth Circuit), and eight district court nominees.  

The Democrats and liberal activist groups have been busy smearing Ryan Bounds for months.  They have been complaining about his nomination moving forward after Oregon's two extremely liberal, Democratic senators returned negative blue slips for him.  Ed Whelan explained why this is sadly ironic:

Democratic senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, along with Republican House member Greg Walden, formed a selection committee to rank candidates for federal judicial vacancies in Oregon. According to this February 2018 letter from Wyden and Merkley to White House counsel Don McGahn, the selection committee “consisted of eight highly experienced and diverse Oregon attorneys” who “carefully reviewed the applications of all the judicial candidates” and interviewed the finalists. Bounds emerged from this process as one of the selection committee’s “four highest ranked candidates” (“listed in alphabetical order”) for the very position to which Trump nominated him. 

You’d think that the fact that the Wyden-Merkley selection committee ranked Bounds as one of the very top candidates would stand him in good stead with them. But Wyden and Merkley have not only declined to support his nomination and even returned negative blue slips on his nomination. . . .

Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii attempted, yet again, to distort the history on blue slips, but the Senate Judiciary Committee majority and RNLA member Ilya Shapiro corrected the misrepresentations in this Twitter thread.

Follow the RNLA on Twitter for updates on the latest judicial nomination and confirmation news.

Judicial Confirmation Update: Resounding Success Despite Democrats' Obstruction

Ed Whelan summarized the current state of the judicial confirmation process on Tuesday in National Review (emphasis added):

— So far this year, the Senate has confirmed three appellate judges—David Stras (CA8) in January, Lisa Branch (CA11) in February, and Kyle Duncan (CA5) just last week—and eleven district judges. That takes the totals from the outset of the Trump administration to 15 appellate judges and 17 district judges (plus, of course, Justice Gorsuch). 

— Six appellate nominations are pending on the Senate floor: Kurt Engelhardt (CA5), Michael Brennan (CA7), Joel Carson (CA10), John Nalbandian (CA6), Michael Scudder (CA7), and Amy St. Eve (CA7). Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has filed cloture motions on all six nominations. The vote on the first, on the Engelhardt nomination, is set to take place on the Senate’s return to business next Monday. The others, I assume, will follow thereafter. How long this process will take is unclear. . . . 

— Two appellate nominees—Mark Bennett (CA9) and Andrew Oldham (CA5)—have had their committee hearing and await being reported out of committee to the Senate floor. Ditto for eight district nominees. 

— Seven appellate picks await their committee hearing: Ryan Bounds (CA9), Britt Grant (CA11), Paul Matey (CA3), David Porter (CA3), and the three announced last week, Richard Sullivan (CA2), Jay Richardson (CA4), and Marvin Quattlebaum (CA4). Twenty-six district picks await their committee hearing, including five announced last week. (The nominations announced last week might not yet have been formally submitted.)

Mr. Whelan points out the lengths to which the Democrats are willing to go to obstruct President Trump's nominees:

Ninth Circuit nominee Ryan Bounds was nominated in September 2017, after Oregon Democratic senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden forwarded his name to the White House as one of four finalists chosen by their own judicial-selection committee. But Merkley and Wyden have submitted negative blue slips on him.

Despite the Democrats' delays and obstruction, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have prioritized vetting and confirming qualified judicial nominees.  While they have sought to work with the Democrats, they have not allowed the Democrats to exercise unilateral vetoes.  Thanks to their efforts and leadership, judges that respect the rule of law, the role of the courts, and the separation of powers are being confirmed at a record rate, which will have a beneficial and long-lasting impact on the entire country. 

Democrats Continue to Filibuster Those They Support

Senate Democrats continue to force cloture votes on President Trump’s nominees that they support! When cloture is invoked, it ends filibusters. However, it still allows a “legislative day” of delay to “invoke” and allows up to 30 additional hours of debate. In other words each time Democrats force a cloture vote, they delay the Senate from working on the problems of the country or confirming the people who are nominated to work for the country.

It is important to note this is not an effort to defeat a nominee.  It is an effort to undermine and delay the Senate and hurt the government.  As Senator Mitch McConnell described yesterday:

Six well-qualified nominees are currently before the Senate. They’re awaiting the full consideration they clearly deserve. Their nominations have been vetted. Their expertise is well-known. Their positions sit empty, waiting to be filled. The American people are waiting for their president to have his full team, and for their federal government to be appropriately staffed.

“Now, if last evening’s vote to advance Claria Horn Boom’s district court nomination were any indication, we’d be in for a productive week. Ninety-six of our colleagues voted in support. Ninety-six. With such broad bipartisan support, you might think that filing cloture should not have been necessary in the first place. With nominees as uncontroversial as these, you might think the Senate should roll quickly through them and move on to other business.

“But unfortunately, for more than a year now, our Democratic friends used the partisan playbook to delay and obstruct even the least-controversial nominees. So unless we can reach the kind of bipartisan agreement that was once the norm, and process noncontroversial nominees more promptly, we’re left with no choice but to proceed the hard way. And that’s just what we’ve done. Facing historic obstruction, Republicans have confirmed ambitious reformers to crucial posts where fresh ideas were long overdue.

Leader McConnell is not letting the Democrats get away with it.  He is keeping the Senate in session this week until six well qualified nominees are confirmed.  Typical of these nominees is Patrick Pizzella, who has been waiting since June 20, 2017, to be confirmed as the Deputy Secretary of Labor.  Leader McConnell added: 

Now, I’ve already stated the Senate will remain in session as long as it takes to clear this slate of nominees. Following the confirmation of Ms. Boom, we’ll move to consideration of John Ring to serve on the National Labor Relations Board.  After Mr. Ring come nominees to the Department of Labor, the EPA, and two more nominees to fill district court vacancies. All vetted. All qualified. All sitting here in the Senate.

Shame on Senate Democrats and thank you Leader McConnell for your commitment to confirm nominees. 

Chairman Chuck Grassley: "Trailblazing Judges Confirmed Despite Delay Tactics"

In Law360 yesterday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley noted the vital importance of judicial nominees who are committed to the rule of law:

Nominating federal judges is one of the president’s most important constitutional duties, because these life-tenured judges often serve for decades on the bench. The most lasting legacy a president leaves on the American legal landscape is the judges committed to the Constitution and the rule of law. 

President Trump's excellent nominees have been confirmed due to his and Majority Leader McConnell's leadership:

The Senate also confirmed 12 judges to the courts of appeals in 2017, a record for the first year of any presidency and four times the number of appellate judges confirmed in the first year of President Obama’s presidency. These judges, all distinguished by stellar legal and academic credentials, enjoyed widespread support in the legal community. The courts of appeals are the courts of last resort for the vast majority of thousands of cases in our federal court system. It has been among my highest priorities, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s, to confirm these extremely well-qualified nominees.

After noting that President Trump's nominees have included many "trailblazers" including the first Indian-American federal judge (when previously confirmed to the district court) Amul Thapar and four confirmed female appellate judges, Chairman Grassley described how this success in confirmation has been hard-won against the Democrats' stubborn obstruction:

It has been especially remarkable that we have been able to confirm so many judges in light of unprecedented obstruction from Senate Democrats. As of the end of February, the Democrats have required the Senate to hold cloture votes to end debate for 28 of Trump’s judicial nominees. They have required this time-consuming process even for nominees with widespread support who are ultimately confirmed by substantial majorities. In contrast, Senate Republicans forced a cloture vote for only one judicial nominee at the same point in President Obama’s presidency. Moreover, the Democrats are insisting on multiple hours of debate on each nominee even when only a fraction of that time is actually used for debate. This has resulted in a bottleneck of as many as 33 committee-approved judicial nominees awaiting votes by the full Senate at a given time. 

This procedural block is not the only way Senate Democrats have attempted to thwart the confirmation of judicial nominees. Despite the fact that President Trump has nominated individuals with broad bipartisan support from their home states, only two of his circuit court nominees confirmed in 2017 received the support of more than 60 senators. The Democrats’ unprecedented lockstep opposition to nearly all of President Trump’s nominees demonstrates the hold that liberal special-interest groups have over the party. 

Chairman Grassley also explained how, contrary to historical precedent, the Democrats are attempting to turn the blue slip courtesy, which encourages the White House to consult home-state senators on nominees, into a one-senator veto.  Thank you, Chairman Grassley and Leader McConnell, for prioritizing these excellent judicial nominees and not allowing Democrats to use the judicial confirmation process as a way to resist President Trump.

Federal Judicial Vacancies Increasing Due to Senate Democrats' Obstruction

Despite the unprecedented number of U.S. Court of Appeals judges confirmed in President Trump's first year in office, Democrat obstruction has lead to more judicial vacancies now than there were a year ago:

Trump came into office in January 2017 with 108 vacancies on the federal bench. Despite rapidly moving to fill the seats, he now has 178 current and known future vacancies, according to the Judicial Crisis Network.

The conservative group reports 146 current vacancies on federal courts and 32 known future vacancies, meaning judges who have announced they will retire. Of the total vacancies, 25 are appeals court judges and 153 are district or specialty court judges. . . .

The slowdown is a result of Senate Democrats’ requiring 30 hours of debate for every nominee, even those who clear the Judiciary Committee unanimously or near unanimously, Severino and others noted. 

“At this rate, it will take the president more than two terms to fill all the vacancies,” [Carrie] Severino said.

Senate Democrats are using these delay tactics solely to score political points with their liberal base and resist President Trump, as they insist on 30 hours of "debate" (i.e., empty Senate floor time) for even nominees with broad, bipartisan support.

Even the center-left Pew Research Center has confirmed that obstruction against President Trump's nominees is unprecedented:

The 23 men and six women Trump has successfully appointed so far have faced a total of 654 “no” votes on the floor of the Senate, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Federal Judicial Center and the U.S. Senate. That works out to an average of nearly 23 votes against each confirmed judge – by far the highest average for any president’s judges since the Senate expanded to its current 100 members in 1959. 

The 330 judges Barack Obama appointed during his eight years in office faced an average of six votes against them. George W. Bush’s 328 confirmed judges faced an average of two, and Bill Clinton’s 382 judges faced an average of just over one. . . .  

Just one of President John F. Kennedy’s 134 confirmed judges drew any “no” votes in the Senate. That was Thurgood Marshall, whom the Senate confirmed to the Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit on a 54-16 vote in 1962. (Four senators voted “present” on Marshall’s nomination; 26 others didn’t vote at all.) All of Kennedy’s other confirmed judges were approved on a voice vote – that is, without any recorded opposition.

Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, also faced little Senate opposition to his judicial choices: All but two of his 186 confirmed judges were approved on a voice vote. 

Thanks to the leadership of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, President Trump's excellent nominees are being vetted, receiving hearings, and receiving votes.  Unfortunately due to the Democrats' unprecedented obstruction, far fewer judges are being confirmed than are needed on the federal bench. 

Two More Judges Confirmed This Week

The Senate confirmed two more of President Trump's excellent judicial nominees this week: Elizabeth Branch, to the Eleventh Circuit, and Marvin Quattlebaum, Jr., to the District Court for the District of South Carolina.  Judge Branch was confirmed by a wide, bipartisan margin, 73 to 23 votes.

This brings the total confirmed in just over a year into President Trump's term to one Supreme Court justice, 14 circuit courts of appeals judges, 11 district court judges, three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and one judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.  Three more district court judges are scheduled for confirmation votes on Monday.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor on Monday:

“The Senate will soon vote to confirm another fine candidate to serve on the federal bench. Yesterday afternoon, we voted to advance the nomination of Judge Elizabeth Branch for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Branch has sat on the Georgia Court of Appeals since 2012. This follows a fine career that spanned both private practice and public service. 

“Judge Branch had previously answered the call to serve at the Department of Homeland Security, where she worked as Associate General Counsel, and then at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Her record and qualifications are well-known. Our colleagues on the Judiciary Committee reported her nomination favorably by an overwhelming vote. 

“Confirming this worthy nominee will be a further credit to the outstanding work of Chairman Grassley and the members of the committee. I encourage all my colleagues to join me in voting to confirm Elizabeth Branch today. Let’s continue to fulfill our constitutional responsibility and confirm the president’s outstanding judicial nominees.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley agreed in his floor statement:

Mr. President, today the Senate is voting to confirm Judge Elizabeth Branch to serve as a U.S. Circuit Court Judge for the Eleventh Circuit. Judge Branch was favorably reported out of the Judiciary Committee on a 19-2 bipartisan vote. She has broad bipartisan support from her home state of Georgia. The American Bar Association rated Judge Branch as unanimously well-qualified. If the Senate confirms Judge Branch, as I’m confident it will, she will be the fourth woman confirmed by the Senate to the federal courts of appeals in the 115th Congress—three more than the one woman confirmed at this point in President Obama’s first term. . . .

As I noted earlier, if confirmed, Judge Branch will become the fourth female circuit-court judge confirmed under President Trump. Her confirmation puts her in good company, joining a class of first-rate female jurists and legal scholars. She will join a group that includes: 7th Circuit Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a former professor at Notre Dame University Law School and law clerk to Justice Scalia; 10th Circuit Judge Allison Eid, a former Colorado Supreme Court Justice and law clerk to Justice Thomas; and 6th Circuit Judge Joan Larsen, another clerk of Justice Scalia and former Michigan Supreme Court Justice. I’m confident that Judge Branch will serve as an excellent addition to this outstanding class of female circuit-court judges.

Judge Branch’s impressive background and bipartisan support suggest that she will be an excellent court of appeals judge.  I am pleased to support her nomination today.

There is still important work to be done, however, as 148 vacancies remain and 58 nominees are still pending (with more regularly being sent over to the Senate).  We thank President Trump, White House Counsel Don McGahn, Chairman Grassley, and Leader McConnell for all their leadership and work selecting, vetting, and confirming these excellent nominees.

Left Targets Judicial Nominee for Representation of Republicans on Election Matters

Yesterday, Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina wrote an op-ed in The Hill, describing the Democrats' obstruction of the judicial confirmation process and attempted character assassination against one of President Trump's nominees, Thomas Farr, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina:

Senate Democrats have been indignantly sounding the alarm that President Trump represents a threat to the independence of the judicial branch. They are apparently unaware that the real threat to our judiciary – the flagrant politicization of our courts and the confirmation process itself – has been facing them in the mirror this entire time. . . . 

Since the moment Mr. Farr was nominated, he has been the subject of a coordinated and viciously dishonest smear campaign from the far-left designed to tank his confirmation. . . .  It’s important to note that this smear campaign has absolutely nothing to do with Mr. Farr’s actual qualifications. He has tried cases in federal and state courts in North Carolina and has handled appeals at all levels of the North Carolina appellate courts, the Fourth and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the Supreme Court. He is highly regarded and deeply respected by his professional colleagues in North Carolina from across the political spectrum. He is rated as “unanimously well-qualified” by the American Bar Association.

What is the basis of the left's special targeting of Mr. Farr for attack?  His representation of Republicans on election-related issues (emphasis added):

Ignoring Mr. Farr’s impressive qualifications, the far-left objects to his role providing legal counsel to Republicans in North Carolina on both voter ID and redistricting cases. This is a break from the bipartisan tradition that we do not hold lawyers accountable for the clients they represent and any animus one may harbor against them. 

Senator Tillis describes how the left and Senate Democrats have repeated misrepresentations about his career in an attempt to destroy Mr. Farr's reputation and character.  He concludes:

It is disappointing that some of my Democratic colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee appear willing to use pandering to the left as a stepping stone for their own political ambitions without any regard given to the reputational harm their posturing will cause to an exceptional attorney and an honorable person.

Fortunately, Chairman Chuck Grassley and the other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are not willing to play the Democrats' political games.  At the Judiciary Committee' executive business meeting today, three circuit judge nominees and fourteen district court nominees, including Mr. Farr, were voted out of committee.  They now move to the Senate floor, where Democrats are employing a different set of delaying tactics, but Majority Leader McConnell has been prioritizing and devoting immense amounts of floor time to confirming judicial nominees.  We thank Senator Tillis, Chairman Grassley, Leader McConnell, and the other Senate Republicans for their commitment to confirming judges who support the rule of law.

President Trump's Superb First Year of Judicial Nominations

Ed Whelan writes about President Trump's superb judicial nominees during his first year in office in the January issue of National Review:

Trump’s most important achievement on the judicial front in 2017 was his appointment of Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch to fill the vacancy left by Antonin Scalia’s death in February 2016. That appointment consummated Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell’s strategy of keeping the vacancy open through the 2016 presidential election, and it resoundingly vindicated the wisdom of that strategy. . . .

In 2017, President Trump also appointed twelve federal appellate judges — a record for a president in his first year in office. . . . Beyond their number, Trump’s appellate appointees have, on the whole, outstanding credentials and are highly regarded in conservative legal circles. Indeed, six of the twelve have already earned their way onto Trump’s list of Supreme Court candidates. The twelve include three women [and] two Asian Americans . . . .

Three factors account for this remarkable success on federal appellate judges. First, the conservative legal movement has grown significantly over the past two decades. . . . Second, thank Harry Reid. In November 2013, the Democratic majority leader pushed to repeal the filibuster for lower-court (and executive-branch) nominees. His success meant that a steadfast minority of 41 or more senators could no longer block a judicial nomination. . . . Third, federal appellate nominations mattered deeply to the key players. Kudos to President Trump and White House counsel Don McGahn for selecting excellent nominees, and to Mitch McConnell and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley for placing a high priority on moving them through to confirmation.

But Mr. Whelan notes that, despite last year's successes, much work remains to be done, partly due to the huge number of vacancies that need to be filled and partly due to the obstruction of Senate Democrats at every step of the process:

Two big obstacles — one at the front end of the nomination process, the other at the back end — have caused these impasses and threaten to continue to stymie judicial confirmations. The front-end obstacle is the Senate Judiciary Committee’s so-called blue-slip privilege, which accords individual senators the opportunity to approve or disapprove of judicial nominees in their home states (and which derives its name from the piece of paper that senators once used to register their views). . . . Given the stark divide on judicial philosophy between the White House and Senate Democrats, not to mention the animosity between them, it’s no surprise that the consultations that the White House has undertaken on judicial nominations have yielded little fruit. . . . [The confirmation] line may prove long and slow because of the back-end obstacle that nominees face: the Senate’s arcane and cumbersome “cloture” process.

The entire article is well worth reading for a summary of the current status of federal judicial nominations.  As he notes, White House Counsel Don McGahn, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley have been instrumental to the success of President Trump's first year, and Americans owe them a debt of gratitude.

Part 2: Top Blog Posts of 2017 - Democrats' Unprecedented Obstructionism

Last Friday, we had the top posts of the year, numbers 10-6.  Today, it is the top 5 posts that unfortunately have a common theme:  Democrats' hyper-partisan obstruction of the Trump Administration.  This is so over the top it would be funny if it was not hurting the governing of our country.   The number one post shows the complete hypocrisy of the Democrats opposition to the Trump Administration.  They are hurting good people for the sake of appeasing their far-left base. 

5.  April 6: “Today, McConnell Ended What Schumer Began with Estrada Filibuster”  Excerpt:

There was much hand wringing over Senator McConnell being forced to invoke the constitutional option today to end the first successful partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee, but partisan filibusters of judicial nominees are not a longstanding Senate tradition.  It began with now-Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's filibuster of Miguel Estrada (who was opposed in large part because he was a conservative Latino).

4.  August 18: “ATL Publishes Vulgar Attack on Former Gorsuch Clerk”  Excerpt:

Perhaps the most telling point in the whole piece is that constitutionalist, textualist, and originalist are just buzzwords used by dumb people, not fully formed, mainstream theories of constitutional and statutory interpretation even adopted by Justice Elena Kagan.  While the crude personal attacks on Mr. Davis are reprehensible, this point shows that what he is really being attacked for is being a conservative who respects the Constitution.  We thank Mr. Davis for his service to our country, even in the face of such vulgar, inappropriate criticism.

3.  November 8: “Sen. Sasse Dismantles ABA as Neutral Arbiter of Judicial Qualifications”  Excerpt:

I'm referring specifically to the smear campaign of the ABA against Steve Grasz, a qualified public servant who has been nominated by the President to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. . . . First, we should discuss the two people who interviewed Mr. Grasz and recognize that, unfortunately, they are blatant partisans with a sad track record of hackery. Second, the ABA Is trying to paint Mr. Grasz as an extremist simply because he did his job as the Chief Deputy Attorney General of Nebraska and defended Nebraskans and Nebraska laws that wanted to outlaw the most barbaric of abortion practices — partial-birth abortion. Third, we should talk about the obvious bigotry of cultural liberals evident in their interview process of Mr. Grasz when they asked him repeated questions about nonlegal matters that had nothing to do with the claims of competence of the ABA. 

2.  April 25: “Democrats Continue to Oppose, Delay and Obstruct Non-Controversial, Qualified Nominees”  Excerpt:

He has the support of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and was an Obama appointee.  He is the longest serving U.S. Attorney in the nation.  Yet, Rod J. Rosenstein has waited almost three months to finally get a chance to be confirmed as Deputy U.S. Attorney General, the number 2 position in the Department of Justice.  Cloture had to be invoked as six Democrats opposed him even getting an up or down vote!

1.    1. February 9: “Senator Nelson Shows His True Feelings after Bowing to Extremist Pressure” (regarding Senator Nelson’s applause following Attorney General Sessions’ confirmation vote) Excerpt:

The Democrats have become totally beholden to extremist elements in their own party. Never has that been more clear than on their recent vote on the confirmation of their colleague Senator Jeff Sessions to be Attorney General.  All Democrats--except Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia--voted against him.  Yet, many Democrat Senators can be seen applauding Sessions' confirmation as Attorney General. 

The Democrats have taken obstruction and partisanship to a new level in their efforts to undermine the American government.