Speaker 1: Sometimes the president's greatest legacy is the judiciary he leaves behind.
Speaker 1: When he was campaigning, now, President Donald Trump used the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court in the judiciary as a way to convince
Speaker 1: Republicans who were reluctant to support him. So the Democrats
Speaker 1: would have an absolute free run. Probably you wouldn't even
Speaker 1: campaign because it would be impossible to win. And what
Speaker 1: does that mean. That means that automatically they are going
Speaker 1: to appoint very, very very liberal judges. Trump has already
Speaker 1: put conservative Justice Neil Gorsich on the Supreme Court, re
Speaker 1: establishing the fine for conservative advantage. Now he's moving to
Speaker 1: shift the federal, appellate and district courts to the right.
Speaker 1: Joining me is Paul Barrett, editor for Bloomberg business Week,
Speaker 1: who has written an article entitled Trump begins shifting courts
Speaker 1: right ward, just as Republicans hoped. Paul, only one other president,
Speaker 1: James Garfield in one, had a Supreme Court vacancy to
Speaker 1: fill as soon as he took office, and Trump also
Speaker 1: has a hundred and seven vacancies on try and appellate courts.
Speaker 1: Why is that vacancy lists so high? Right, and the
Speaker 1: number of openings has actually increased to a hundred and
Speaker 1: thirty six since he took office. And a big part
Speaker 1: of the reason why it's so high is the Republican
Speaker 1: strategy under Senator Mitch McConnell of holding open those seats
Speaker 1: not confirming UH President Obama's nominees. And that was UH
Speaker 1: put into effect most dramatically with the Supreme Court opening. UH.
Speaker 1: You had Justice Scalia who died unexpectedly in February of
Speaker 1: UM and hit and that seat just stayed open even
Speaker 1: though Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to fill it UM
Speaker 1: and it was held open until President Trump took office.
Speaker 1: When people think of presidential judicial appointments, they usually think
Speaker 1: about the Supreme Court, but explain the importance of the
Speaker 1: appellate and district court judges. Sure, there are eight hundred
Speaker 1: and ninety slots, and the lower federal courts and the
Speaker 1: district courts are the place where trials criminal and civil
Speaker 1: take place, and the federal circuit courts are the appellate
Speaker 1: courts where the losing party can can appeal. And from
Speaker 1: the circuit courts, a small number of cases are filtered
Speaker 1: up to the Supreme Courts, some seventy or seventy five
Speaker 1: A year. So because the Supreme Court takes so few cases,
Speaker 1: a lot of matters for for all practical purposes are
Speaker 1: resolved in the lower courts. So if you have an
Speaker 1: individual dispute um, that's likely where it's going to get resolved.
Speaker 1: And even if you have a test case um where
Speaker 1: there's some big question of law a foot, still it's
Speaker 1: likely to be one of the courts of appeals that
Speaker 1: has the final word because the Supreme Court, you know,
Speaker 1: all likelihood will simply decline to review the case. Trump
Speaker 1: outsourced the Supreme Court pick to two establishment conservative groups.
Speaker 1: Is he doing the same with the other vacancies. Yes.
Speaker 1: The Heritage Foundation in waw Shington and the Federalist Society,
Speaker 1: which has chapters all over the country based at law
Speaker 1: schools and elsewhere, are playing a significant role in advising
Speaker 1: uh President Trump's White House staff, as they have played
Speaker 1: that role for past Republican president So this is not
Speaker 1: anything new. These outside groups basically are kind of recruitment vehicles. Um,
Speaker 1: they're familiar with lawyers all over the country who might
Speaker 1: not be immediately familiar to the White House. Liberal judicial
Speaker 1: activists are concerned that Trump shaping the judiciary is going
Speaker 1: to mean cutbacks, you know, going backward on hard for
Speaker 1: rights and liberties. Can he accomplish that in four years?
Speaker 1: He can, if if he moves aggressively to fill these
Speaker 1: these open slots. And he's just beginning to do that now.
Speaker 1: He's made fifteen nominations to the lower courts so far. UM.
Speaker 1: If he moves quickly, he can begin to shift the
Speaker 1: balance back towards the red and away from the blue. UM.
Speaker 1: And UH, I think the liberal groups are uh, you know,
Speaker 1: justified in their fear because UH, with advice from the
Speaker 1: Federal Society and Herrihage Foundation, UH, the White House has
Speaker 1: been choosing impressive uh, particularly courts of appeals UH nominees.
Speaker 1: And these are people who in many cases have had
Speaker 1: a scholarly background and then have served in lower court
Speaker 1: or or or themselves law professors. And they're the kind
Speaker 1: of people who will have influence if they get on
Speaker 1: the court. I take it they're all very conservative. Is
Speaker 1: there any chance that some of them will not get through? Well? Yes,
Speaker 1: I mean in in any administration, there's usually at least
Speaker 1: at the fringes. UM, some nominee judicial nominees who become
Speaker 1: the focus of controversy and that is already true. Um
Speaker 1: with the Trump nominees. Uh, there's a guy named Damien
Speaker 1: Schiff and a Kentucky lawyer named John Bush, and both
Speaker 1: of them, as it happens, were prolific bloggers in their
Speaker 1: earlier life and gave expression to what I think it's
Speaker 1: uh safe to say or some rather far right political views,
Speaker 1: which is fine if you're just a blogger, but can
Speaker 1: become embarrassing if you're up for confirmation. And I think
Speaker 1: those two in particular, UM may find themselves with a
Speaker 1: fight to get through the Senate. It's a very important topic,
Speaker 1: a great article. Thanks as always for being here, Paul Barrett,
Speaker 1: Editor for Bloomberg business Week,