You don't do your viewers any favors by not mentioning that McGahn's uncle, Patrick, was Trump's lawyer/fixer while in Atlantic City, that his father was a lawyer, and his step-uncle a doctor and in the state legislature that brought in gambling. The McGahn's were a prominent family in Atlantic County so to imply Don grew up on the mean streets of Atlantic City is very far from reality.
1
McGann is a religious right fanatic and not an attorney with a principled sense of the law. He and McConnell used Trump’s election to reshape the Federal Judiciary into what they believe will become a partisan defender of the agenda of the
Religious Right and its conservative movement.
In doing so they have destroyed the independence of the Judicial Branch and its integrity as an interpreter of the law. Of course, Trump didn’t care although until recently he was a New Yorker who was for abortion rights. McGann’s cynical actions in packing the court with similar Right Wing Zealots will harm our democracy and its progressive journey in representing more fairly the views of an increasingly diverse population who expect more equality and social progress. This will be Trump’s most lasting legacy as a President who lost the popular vote by 3 million votes and yet governs indifferently to that fact.
What a failure of majority rule and the views of most Americans! What a perversion of what a Democracy and a judicial system should be!
5
Thank you NYT for reporting on another privileged lawyer manipulating at the highest level of our nation. It is most important to know exactly who is ruining it to protect a powerful few. Truly repellent
2
Make no mistake—McConnell gets 100% credit for this “accomplishment”. Had Jeb been elected president McGahn and McConnell and the Federalist Society would have done the exact same thing with judicial appointments.
2
The Republicans have completely discredited the judiciary in America. Because of their actions I no longer believe in lifetime appointments. We must get these politicians out of their positions as judges. Corporations are people? That’s the most il-“legal” decision I have ever seen. Shameful politics.
10
Excellent Journalism, and digging deep, here. Any thoughts/fears of a "Kafkaesque third branch of Government" in America today, are most certainly real, here, and right now. Beyond all of McGhan's actions being a finely plotted scenario (and, he & others pulled it off ...), this is very scary stuff.
No wonder "our Justice Department" doesn't want McGhan to testify about what he knew, and when, regarding everything from halting the Russian Investigation, to stacking the deck at the Supreme Court.
While Democracy has never been a picnic, can we at least have honesty, transparency, and running our Nation by the Constitutional Rules?
I hope that those days are not gone, Forever.
7
McGahn is a smart cookie. He’s not going to go to jail for Trump, the way so many have already done.
He’s not going to lie. He may prevaricate if allowed to do so. He may also claim executive privilege over certain things, but since national security isn’t an issue, it would be bit like taking the fifth - we’d all know what the answer would have been.
4
Conservative doesn't accurately describe the philosophy Trump appointees bring to the court. A more accurate description is radical Bircher, Libertarian. Five out of nine members of the Supreme Court and 90% of his lower court appointees are members of the Federalist Society. A fringe group whose membership make up 5% of all American lawyers. The Federalist Society got its startup funding from the likes of the Koch Bros. and Mercers, men who think social programs are tax cuts for the rich and the elimination of regulatory oversight. This once great country as we have known it is going to be replaced with a corrupt kleptocracy ruled by plutocrats and oligarchs. Good luck Americans.
12
You are so correct. This is a judiciary that embraces the interests of the corporate state and the Religious Right fanatics. They have a fascistic view of Judicial power serving the powerful! This will not end well for our future as a working democracy.
1
The article says he is going to make millions at some high powered law firm.Not being a lawyer myself but i do admit to having a tad of common sense. All of the lawyers who are shilling for Trump would cringe if someone said Disbarment.How can officers of the court play the judicial system the way they are and get away with it.isn't it time the Left got as ruthless as their opponents?
5
We need Shakespeare of Tony Kushner to chronicle this tragedy. RBG and I have to last long enough to depart without a heavy heart. I weep for my country, but I think the young people will rescue us in the next decade. Please save us kids. Thank you.
5
Boy, I thought I've lived through a lot of bad-stuff-going-on in this country, but now is really worse than all the rest of "my American history" put together. I'm sorry to be living in this horrible time, I read the obituaries and envy those who are done. I don't have too many years left and not a lot of optimism that our democracy will survive our present 'on life support' situation within my lifetime.
6
As this article states, McGahn did an impressive amount of good for Trump and the conservatives. He has won his fixed game.
Perhaps now that he is forced to testify, McGahn will cash his chips and underscore his place in history by publicly calling attention to Trump's shortcomings, mendacity, and existential threat to the U.S. through Russia
4
McGahn & Kavanaugh: Separated at Birth? They even LOOK alike!
22
He is just a show promoter. Good at tooting his horn and leaking to the press only favorable aspect of his role in this dystopia we found our self in. If he has any honor he should go to congress and be honest and stop this self prolongation and guard to secure a supreme court position in the future. It funny NYtimes seems to always provide a favorable opinion of him even when he is grand standing against the rule of law. He is no savior of the republic I can tell you that.
15
@Emmanuel
If he had any honor, he would gut himself for his role in visiting on us a judiciary that will have to be neutralized to save the republic. Just sayin’ what Jefferson said two centuries ago.
3
Each side always accuses the other party of making political appointments to the court. Has been true for many decades and many swings in political power. I see that in long run there has been balance as the power has moved back and forth. The constitution works!
3
@david The Constitution does not work well when avowed partisanship among judges replaces the commitment to impartiality that has always been essential to the rule of law. Partisan appointments have been the norm, as you acknowledge, since Ronald Reagan made them so, and has since become a vicious cycle drawing in both parties. Notwithstanding your blithe assurance of "balance" in "the long run," the long term result has been a gradual erosion of good faith in the decisions of the judiciary as well as the integrity of its processes.
5
McGahn is a frightening right-wing ideologue who enabled Trump because Trump would approve of his anti-democratic views. The fact that he needed a Judge to order him to abide by the rule of law, proves that he believed he is a member of a special class that does not need to obey the law.
Will he now obey the Subooena? McGahn is a hypocrite Supreme.
23
When Donald Trump is convicted of treason after he is voted out of office next November, will it be possible to demand that all appointments of judges by a traitor should be considered null and void, and have Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and all of the other reactionaries removed?
Dan Kravitz
36
@Dan Kravitz
I wish
1
Your other headline says “in a victory for Democrats “. Why not a victory for the Constitution? A victory for rule of law? A victory for the American people? Stop making this about party and about the thugocarts vs the rest of us?
42
@Dennis:
The NYT didn't "make this about party"; the GOP did.
Every Goper member of Congress is enabling this criminal administration. So yes, it's a victory for rule of law, but Gopers don't care about rule of law. They think they're above it. It IS "thugocrats vs. the rest of us."
2
@Dennis
d'accord!
1
Has McGahn got a book deal rolling yet? Probably. And probably can beat Bolton’s $2 million advance. So Dakine, as we say in HawaiiNei, no more books by crooks!!! I will not buy them or read them. Our Democracy Matters.
11
@Puarau
good point!
from napua in NYC, family from Lahaina
1
Kavanaugh criminally assaults women and HE'S the one who's outraged when it's thrown in his face?
What a country.
21
One of the reasons Trump has so much attraction with his 63 million is that he has PROMISED to load the courts with people who believe what he does.
According to a lot of the ABA reports, many of his nominees have a level of knowledge and education and approach that he does.
Sad and scary.
38
If this goes to the Supreme Court we just know that we will see a political decision. Just like the president’s taxes.
20
@Dan - also similar to what befell Al Gore in Florida, maybe?
7
Donald F. McGahn II is not an American patriot. History will remember Mr. McGahn as a white supremacist usurper, who worked for an utterly unethical US President.
46
I would like to understand how McGann still has his license to practice law in light on continued refusal to comply with a subpoena? What are the rules for disbarment in such situations?
48
This idea that the media chisels into the minds of people to view judges as either Democratic or Republican is completely wrong and inexcusable. Why is the media so determined to drive a wedge amongst jurists? Each time a case comes before a judge the media will be quick to label the judge by a president who appointed him/her. This is bad journalism.
7
@Muthu1
Your point is excellent; thank you for making it.
2
@Muthu1 ~
While there was some of this a decade ago, may I point out that the Senate wouldn't even consider Obama's nominee to the SCOTUS, who had previously been unanimously approved for most everything, hoping that the GOP could load the court.
It is "our" POTUS who has played that game, and many others, to point at and accuse and insult ... anyone ... who doesn't agree with him.
Correct?
22
@Muthu1
No, it is a bad political system. They are just telling it how it is. Read up on our system a bit, it might help you understand the issue.
14
Terrifying and makes the case for banning all lifetime appointments for any judicial position. They all need to be capped. Dems missed the boat on making this a campaign issue.
28
Jones Day is a pretty shady law firm...
10
If a progressive like Bernie or Elizabeth take back the white house and manage to get control of the senate, the courts will have to consent to undo Trump's gutting of the EPA and surrendering to fossil fuel companies and drug companies and others who like some tech companies need to be reined in for our welfare.
The 1% have become too powerful when the air we breathe, the water we drink, and our children's future are in jeopardy. We have a lot of undoing to do, and we need to reach out to like minded people around the globe who are working for people over profit.
36
@betty durso time to enlarge the Supreme Court if the Dems take over...otherwise nothing Positive gets done.
11
It’s not clear why Everyman wants a so called conservative court because that will favor corporation over people & at the expense of the majority, e.g. fossil’s free reign over our life support systems. And what of this bizarre suggestion that LGBTQ are the source of any of our problems such that we need laws to prevent people from loving each over if their genders don’t align with binary mind; what is this fear really about? The high and mighty dare to concern themselves with other peoples bedroom business even as that’s God’s job, but it’s long past time to realize we don’t want our courts doing that too!
17
I'm concerned that there is a real danger of future civil unrest here - as Federal Courts stacked with right-wing corporatist pseudo-Christian/theist judges that limit individual freedoms and economic opportunity, and that sanctify polluting the environment for short-term profit - will run up against younger generations of Americans that are increasingly inclusive and progressive in their outlook.
49
Everyone forgets these people can be impeached and removed or otherwise forced from their robes. Nothing is set in stone. The courts can even be expanded and packed.
17
@DG
Didn't know that. Any historic cases of this happening in the Supreme Court.
1
Absolutely, the SCOTUS did not always have nine justices and there is no sacrosanct number in the Constitution. It can be altered by law. The country needs to expand the number of justices to 11 and bring terms to sixteen years on a rolling basis so that any President has the opportunity to name two justices per term to then be considered and confirmed or not by the Senate. Hearings and a vote should be required as part of what advise and consent means in the Constitution; ideally this would be done be Constitutional Amendment but getting 2/3rds of the states to agree would not seem possible so it should start with a law and go from there. If it works well perhaps support for an amendment would increase enough to accomplish that. Aside from that the country needs to reform the drawing of districts to independent committees instead of legislatures, reform the census system with a more accurate counting method and conduct one every five years not ten, and create a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally, and a path to statehood for the unrepresented citizens of the US in DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, the USVI, American Samoa, and the 12 other disenfranchised territories we control.
1
I think I pay enough for this paper, thousands per year, that I should not have to also subscribe to an online service, FX or Hulu, to get their product. This may be the latest brainchild of the digital natives at your company, but it's an insult to those whose money keeps you afloat.
9
@ondelette Well said--
6
@ondelette ~
"Thousands per year"?
Proof, please.
7
Not a conservative, but hoping that the crazy 9th Circuit can be tempered by a bit of Conservatism.
2
this is perhaps slightly off-topic, but poignant within the confines of my "boomer" age group: when he is not working to assure that the frat boys and the sorority girls will continue to inherit what is left of this once green earth, mr mcgahn actually has the audacity to play in a rock and roll band!
such is the thrust of post modernism, i suppose. that said-- my opinion of mr mcgahn's work in both areas is unprintable in your admirable paper.
9
This is not Don McGahn and this is not yet over and done, McGahn.
This is the undemocratic Senate made even more undemocratic by voter suppression, organized election office(r) fraud, and surgical voting machine manipulation, without which it would be blue including Beto O'Rourke and Bill Nelson in its ranks, and would have confirmed a great many balanced judges nominated by President Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton.
Besides it is the Federalist Society which should be renamed the Society of Backwards Thinking Sadists and Kleptocrats since it is just a front for oligarchic monied speech. It's the worst locker room of the planet hosting those who play "rape the land, rape the nation, and while we're at it, let's have our quick cherry-pick off the sex slave trafficking trade buffet and rape a poor Jane Doe."
Much in the same way they prepared to surgically rip a trillion off middle class home owners in blue states.
This is the full and relentless application of what was already backward thinking in the fifties with the stubborn refusal to make amends for any of the added findings and insights that have come about since, and today Stephen Bannon drools all over himself at the prospect of extending that thought freeze another 30 years.
By power grab they run the show.
As they go low, we go die.
15
At least Scalia and Roberts had/have brains and stellar legal backgrounds. A lot of the crop chosen by McGahn have been decried by the ABA. And that includes the beer lovin', alleged sexual abuser Kavanaugh (we never did get that investigation, did we???? No, as soon as he was was a Supreme he was declared above the law -- which we all should have a problem with). McGahn and the GOP have largely stuffed the judicial branch with legal and mental weak links.
27
These fascists succeed in a democracy because not enough people of conscience vote to overcome the unconscious Republican haters. No, Hillary was not black, yet those who stayed home because she was not are perhaps regretting their non-action. What about young people who ignore politics because it is 'boring' to them? Now lamenting Trump's pro-global warming policies? Cry me a (dried-up) river.
Right-wingers vote. They voted for Hitler, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Trump. These elections had horrifying consequences for all except sociopaths. What is it going to take for Americans to wake up?
28
Mr McGahn refused a congressional subpoena, in compliance with an illegal White House gag order. What basis is there for ANYONE to refuse a lawful congressional subpoena?
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/don-mcgahn-helped-trump-remake-federal-courts/589957/
13
It’s kinda funny. Liberals & progressives worked so hard for decades, but once Obama was elected they took their eye off the ball. The left thought they had won. Everyone swooned & jumped for joy, thought the fight was over. But it’s all about the long game. Thank goodness we had someone like Trump who realized this and plowed thru. Trump has managed to not only set this country back on the right track, he completely destroyed 30 yrs of progressive achievements, and appointed a record amount of judges. All while fighting Democrats & the MSM by himself. Our guy is better than yours🤣
4
Laughing all the way to the funny farm.
9
@Joseph yes, and in the true long game, we are all losers when conservatives strip away the regulations that keep our air, food and water safe. As Jarod Diamond says in his book, Collapse, the rich and privileged may die last, but they all die.
25
A friend and I recently shared a personal secret: we're both glad we're pretty old at this point. The direction Republicans and other conservatives are taking this nation and its people is rewriting the principles upon which our nation was founded. The Declaration of independence, the Bill of Rights and the overall constitution are being swept away and the proposed replacements are taking us in the opposite direction toward an oligarchy with a taste of theocracy: the founding fathers tried to preempt our nation taking these directions, but, apparently, were unsuccessful. Just look around you.
14
Judges are the least supervised of all US officials the public experiences, and its courts are extortion rackets.
6
This is going to be an crushing social and economic problem as our country tries to move forward. It will take some very creative thinking, by squeaky clean new representatives to wash out the judiciary before they do too much more damage. I would start with the impeachment of sexual predator and LIAR, Bret Kavanaugh.
20
this is perhaps slightly off-topic, but poignant within the confines of my "boomer" age group: when he is not working to assure that the frat boys and the sorority girls will continue to inherit what is left of this once green earth, mr mcgahn actually has the audacity to play in a rock and roll band!
such is the thrust of post modernism, i suppose. that said-- my opinion of mr mcgahn's work in both areas is unprintable in your admirable paper.
3
McGahn claims to be pursuing the rule of law--a right wing vision of the rule of law, yes, but the rule of law nonetheless.
Now that he has gotten what he wants for the right wing--a shift in the courts that cannot be undone--it's time for him to obey the rule of law himself.
Whatever the cost, he should testify before a Congressional impeachment committee and reveal the truth of the claim that he refused Trump's order to tell Deputy AG Rosenstein to fire Special Counsel Mueller
11
People keep saying our judiciary is doomed to be right wing for generations. We need to remember that people die and people move on. It will change.
1
Sad to say that the hope for the future of our nation is an early death for some weird, unqualified people put on the SCOTUS for political gain.
6
@pb
Yes, eventually there will be turnover, but until then there is unnecessary suffering and destruction. That’s the problem.
7
The thing is almost ALL Supreme Court decisions can be overturned by the Supreme Court itself. So what ever they decide, their decisions can be undone. And do not forget Congressd has a huge part to play in inacting laws that the Supreme Court uses to base its decisions on. This also includes the Constitution, Bill of Rights and other documents. Which seem to have been forgotten about by this Court specifically. So this mauy give the conservatives another 40 to 50 years. But they too will fade into obscurity. One thing Republicans and Conservatives constantly forget is that nothing is static, things always change. And this Supreme Court is the most open to change by law in recent memory. I wonder if they know it is almost 2020, and not 1850.
2
Hopefully, at the end of those 40 or 50 years, religion will have gone into that gentle night as well.
2
I prefer conservative judicial representation instead of liberal.
2
Perhaps that works in Belgium, but not here. Stay where you are!
6
America was founded by religious fanatics, criminals and those seeking refuge from persecution. If religious zealots win, we have lost our country which is founded on the separation of church and state.
28
Well it will conform more to the Founders original intents, yes.
1
This will hasten the collapse.
13
Leftists wonder at evangelical Christian support for a guy like Trump. It's because, unlike the Left, the Right knows how to focus on the end game, knows how to organize from the bottom up, knows how to take the long view, knows how to address people in a language they understand, knows how to use what's out there to get what they want, knows how to weave a narrative that addresses people's needs and values as they perceive them, not as a candidate says they should perceive them. Hard, creative, strategic work pays off, even if often predicated on manipulation, lies, and retrogressive principles.
Meanwhile, the current iteration of the Left lives in a world of aspirational fantasy, adept at little other than forming a circular firing squad.
31
The right offers nothing for humanity. It's focused on greed, religious dogma, bigotry, and greed.
67
Trump will be the destruction of the GOP. I think you’re giving the right a little too much credit.
20
Interesting comment, but firing squads can shoot in several directions. The GOP attempt to remake the judiciary into a White Male image will fail. Being unable to negotiate anything except to that end is a fallacy fostered by the likes of Trump, Gingrich and McConnell. The resultant conclusion will be a complete disaster for us all.
25
I have yet to comprehend why the right feels so strongly about judges who will restrict the rights of others. If rights are expanded, it doesn't mean that conservatives have to avail themselves of the new rights. e.g. if you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.
57
@A E M let me help you then. Eliminating a Christian baker’s business because he was practicing his faith (exactly as our Founding Father’s believed) is taking his rights. Telling people they have to buy insurance they don’t want us limiting their freedom. Giving 5 unelected people the power to tell them that their kids must accept views that were never accepted until recently is taking away their freedom of thought, to parent, to be left alone. Please learn our history and educate yourself that the Constitution is a limitation on the government BECAUSE our Founding Fathers did not trust government. Look at how small and limited the Federal Government was until the early 1900’s.
8
It's about power and trying to remain at all costs. The demographics of the US will change but the legal system will remain largely white and male with McGahn's selections. It will impact generations of minorities and women for years to come.
12
Red herrings. Create an emotional issue (abortion), create fear issues (government will take your guns away, immigrants will take jobs away). Create a voter base built on these issues. They will not pay attention to the other issues in the list.
17
It’s ironic that Trump doesn’t really share the conservative principles that were used to contaminate the courts.
28
McGahn sickens me as much as McConnell, Graham or any republican. Their interests are their own, the country be damned.
100
The Republicans have done a huge disservice to the American people by politicizing the courts. In this new era, there is only one thing to do. When the Democrats take control of government again, create new judgeships to neutralize this corruption and expand the Supreme Court. Once equality is achieved, then we can have a discussion about how to depoliticize the court, but until balance is restored, no way. Many of these inexperienced lawyers they are appointing have never tried a case. It is beyond pathetic and a huge disservice to the American people. McGhan and McConnell are a disgrace to our democracy.
158
@Todd should our country survive the debacle of this treasonous administration, hopefully many of these judges will be impeached. Because of the caliber of these toadies, it's only a matter of time before they will break the law one way or another.
41
@Todd The Republicans have truly poisoned the well. Until recently, judicial appointments were usually balanced an noncotroversial Most of the time they were approved unanimously by the Senate.
I hope that the Dems will manage a countercoup, but that should not be the end of it. Once the Supreme Court has come into approximate balance, nominations should require a 4/5 vote in the Senate for approval. That will ensure that they are nonpartisan.
39
@Todd Yes. The War of the Judges has started and will continue throughout our lives now. Eventually, a national plebiscite will be required. God does not generally intervene. Only voters.
25
Can't wait until a Democratic president and Senate Majority is achieved. We will use all of the Republican's tactics against them to fix all that they destroyed in our country.
36
@KR
I hope the Democrats play fair and not resort to the base level of republicans. We want people of honor in our government, not ones of the low caliber of republicans.
22
@MLE53 Fairness only works if everyone applies it.
17
I agree with you about fair play, but playing nice is part of the reason we’re suffering through this mess.
26
I get the feeling that this administration has learned all its lessons from Russia.
71
I think the true culprit here is the senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell: he did not even allow Obama's candidate for Supreme Court judgeship to be considered, even though Obama still had a year left in his presidency. It was then left to Mr. McGahn to fill in the blanks as it were. We now have Judge Kavanaugh with a dubious past sitting on the high court with the help and advice of Mr. McGahn. Even if one does not believe he was involved in sexual activity with unwilling victims - one cannot discount Judge Kavanaugh's aberrant behavior during the Blasey-Ford hearing or the negative vote of the American Bar Association on his suitability for the judgeship.
97
@Gladys
McGahn is as bad as McConnell. All the republicans allowed the McConnell shenanigans. Kavanaugh is an insult to lawyers everywhere. Gorsuch seemed to believe he was entitled to a stolen seat. What does that say of him?
40
@MLE53 I totally agree with you. Thank you for taking this predicament one step further.
1
A friend and I recently shared a personal secret: we're both glad we're pretty old at this point. The direction Republicans and other conservatives are taking this nation and its people is rewriting the principles upon which our nation was founded. The Declaration of independence, the Bill of Rights and the overall constitution are being swept away and the proposed replacements are taking us in the opposite direction toward an oligarchy with a taste of theocracy: the founding fathers tried to preempt our nation taking these directions, but, apparently, were unsuccessful. Just look around you.
33
@Glenn Thomas
I would also say that Republicans are re-writing, but in the sense of reestablishing in the courts the founding principles that the left has done its best to sweep away, ignore, or uproot entirely. We should all applaud their effort to restore the judicial system to its original constitution, and the Constitution to its original purposes.
1
Don't roll over. This is our country. Simple, To get around the republican's unpatriotic scams, and their 'ill gotten gains' on the court...Remove the Gorsuch and Kavanaugh or....
11 Justices, not 9.
30
Perhaps we should acknowledge that the Supreme Court is, in fact, partisan and apportion the seats accordingly.
15
“Democracy In Changes” Republican’s 21 century return to slavery.
7
"The total number of Obama Article III judgeship nominees to be confirmed by the United States Senate is 329, including two justices to the Supreme Court of the United States, 55 judges to the United States Courts of Appeals, 268 judges to the United States district courts, and four judges to the United States Court"
As scary as this article is, I look at President Obama's appointments and am duly impressed. If Trump gets a second term, that's when court Armageddon will occur.
So please vote.
36
What shocks and angers me is how the progressive majority has been so thoroughly outflanked and outmaneuvered by the right. They have been patient and calculating and bet on the difficulty of modern life for working class Americans to survive day to day, let alone be educated and active citizens. They have won for a long time to come with regards to the judiciary.
The legislative branch is our only hope of overturning this coup.
10
@Hazel the idea of a progressive majority is not true, they are coastal and elsewhere not necessarily registered to vote or showing up to vote.
3
It is truly horrifying how the right wing has reshaped the Federal Judiciary and politicized it to further their right wing oligarchic agenda. It is an abuse of power and a failure of the right wing to comprehend the idea of the separation of power and the requirement for an independent and impartial judiciary branch. To think they did it after losing the popular vote by 3 million votes in a very tainted Presidential election is painful and ironic. The right wing is Machiavellian, opportunistic and unconcerned with the views of a majority of Americans, particularly the young, women, and those who are not their type of religious right Christian. They want to impose their views on others and that is truly undemocratic. It doesn’t augur well for the future of this nation as a democracy.
22
The headline for this is so depressing I couldn't go on. To have what I consider to be greedy, mean-spirited people directing who becomes judges is so disturbing and depressing I don't want to know more. With Trump in power and all that entails, I can only handle so much.
14
I've gotten so when i see a photo of an white man in a suit, i feel doomed-which is unfair i know to the many white men who have integrity-but i admit my initial prejudice. These men must be deeply afraid of everyone who is not male, white, straight, and (claim to be) christian to act as they do; ostracizing the majority of the world's population and keeping us contained where we have no power as individuals. Some day history will repeat itself and there will be a revolt in America too.
10
Donald Trump has done nothing but sow discord and give cover to real talent who've made spectacular moves in his oversized shadow. Hats off to Don McGahn, a legitimate player. The Republican Senate has certainly pushed through a hoard of unqualified nominees but to the victors go the spoils right? Hopefully in 2020 Democratic voters won't sit at home zoning out.
6
@EC Donald Trump did NOT get the popular vote. Voting districts are gerrymandered, resulting in reducing the power of the individual's vote.
17
Gerrymandering doesn't, and can't, have any effect on national elections
6
@judy fishman Correct. But 4.4 million democratic voters that showed up for Obama failed to show up for Clinton. Critical in states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Clinton's campaign shares the blame but it is a citizens responsibility, their duty to show up and vote.
9
Republicans know that they can’t win on ideas. The majority of Americans simply don’t want what they’re selling so Republicans have had to engineer work arounds, lie outright, and accept support from places like Russia. Then, they all congratulate each other for being so smart, not because they have good ideas to make America better but because they got away with the con.
They’re terribly frightened, weak little men who haven’t done an honest day’s work in their lives. And they get away with their shenanigans by relying on the fact that the majority of Americans (people like Bannon would consider them suckers) just want to live their lives in a way that’s best for everybody. 
There have always been men like this, of course, but the con was confined regionally. Communications and transportation that’s global and immediate allowed these people to amplify their ability to ruin lives globally. We need new tools to recognize these tactics quicker, and new laws to shut these men down faster.
26
Tasty recipe for a more authoritarian regime:
Ingredients
1 Narcissistic leader
A bunch of unscrupulous henchmen
A throng of hateful people (preferably ignorant)
A country with people of different ethnic origin, religion and political views (preferably susceptible to populism)
Instructions
- Set high ambitious goals of more executive power.
- Turn politics into a reality show where you are the fearless director.
- Use the chaos to undermine media (if possible take full control of media)
- Get some of the henchmen to work behind the scenes to increase executive power.
- Get some of the other henchmen to influence the legislative branch (if possible also put a few not-to-smart-easy-to-control guys in the executive branch as well)
- Have the remaining henchmen appointed officials to key government agencies.
- Fearmonger at will though fear not to lie in your advantage and ruthless deny should anyone call you out when doing it.
Let simmer, stir daily and before you know it your regime is ready.
Enjoy dish served with a military parade and some propaganda of yourself in ridiculous situations (riding a bear with no shirt, playing Augusta National on 18 strokes, or eq.).
44
We will just set term limits and get rid of them. If they are GOP criminals, they will make a mistake and then they will be removed. I am tired of the fear mongers. We the people of the US are not going to be robbed of our liberties. Stay Strong!
37
@Firestar1571
Term limits would not affect sitting judges.
8
@Firestar1571 Term limits would only strengthen the power of the 2 party system. Individual office holders would have less influence than if they were able to build policies according to their values. Their constituents are responsible for returning them to office because they approve of their records.
When Trump came in, the Federalist and Heritage Societies handed Trump a pre-digested list of whom they would find acceptable for up-coming Supreme Court seats.
Thankfully we are now within the time-box of Trump or his successor picking another seat.
Obama was refused the right to pick Scalia's replacement becaus, as we all remember, it was getting up to be a "year" before the next Presidential election.
So, for no reason anyone has ever been able to figure out, it was left for Obama's replacement to choose whomever he wanted - as long as the name came from these 2 cults.
Well, thank goodness those days are over.
The NEXT President will be choosing any replacements.
Hopefully, that person will find a better list of choices to select from.
And, hopefully, they will choose 5 or 10 new Justices, for the Constitution does not state how "many" it takes to be a court. This county does not have to endure becoming the most regressive Court ever to sit.
12
McGahn , a man in the mold of Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove and Lee Atwater.
23
The film language and tone make it sound like a huge conspiracy, such nonsense!
Republican, Democrat, or independent, those who hold the the Oval Office get to put judges on benches, thats the way the laws are written. To contrive that some clandestine movement by Don Megan is unprecedented and scandalous is ridiculous— Obama’s presidency placed 2 Supreme Court justices and some 320 or federal judges durning his 8 years (trump numbers 2 scotus and some 150 or so federal). Wow, how is that different NYT?
This is why people are skeptical of how media frames things —and it continues to make this independent voter pretty disgusted.
9
@Thinking I often consider stopping my NYT subscription because I see more and more sensational headlines and emphasis on op-eds. My political identity is left of center and I can see bias. Although it is far worse elsewhere and on principle, I support a local subscription and cannot find a better local paper. For national news i go to the Washington Post. I cringe often when reading the NYT the past 2 years.
6
The qualifications of the recent nominees - who get quickly ratified by the Republican side - that is the issue. The numbers make the impact scarier. That many unqualified but loyal to the cause judges in courts all over the country.
5
@Thinking
Clearly you are not thinking. The devil is in the details. McConnell pushed most nominations through without due process. Therein lies the problem. It's called stacking the courts. Look it up.
5
Want to know McGhan’s part in paying for Kavanaugh’s SCOTUS appointment. Someone or group paid off at least $300,000 for Kavanaugh’s move and appointment.
5
I have very little respect for Donald F. McGahn II because he fails to inform Congress of Trump's attempts to obstruct justice. When called to testify he used the White House as a shield so as not to interfere with his work at Jones Day, the conservative law firm that is very friendly to the Trump administration. I have very little respect for that....
16
This article should sear into voters minds that one of the most consequential aspects of an election and their vote is the shaping of the judiciary for generations. It is a concept more obscure than campaign promises such as "lower taxes" or "free college" but it is much more important. I have been arguing here and elsewhere since 2015 that the Supreme Court and other nominations is more important than the Bernie/Hillary divide or throwing one's vote away on a third party candidate, but too many people just don't get it.
8
Last night I watched the popular film "Erin Brockovich", the true story of the efforts of a young women working with a small-time lawyer's firm to uncover the role of PG&E in the pollution the ground water of a small California community.
It wasn't just any old polluting done by PG&E either. This was deadly chemical compounds found in high levels in the drinking water of several hundreds of children and adults who sickened with serious or terminal illnesses.
At the end of the film the legal maneuver taken by the plaintiffs (the victims of the chemical exposure) is to not hold a jury trial because of machinations that could allow the defense (PG&E) to drag the case through one court battle after another, perhaps taking decades in stalling tactics and leaving plaintiffs with no justice or monetary settlement.
Instead, the plaintiffs agreed on a judge-only trial leaving their fate in the hands of just one person. It was terribly risky.
As it turned out, the judge made the decision against PG&E, citing them several tens of millions of dollars to be paid directly to the plaintiffs, and holding them accountable for cleaning up the highly contaminated areas they had left polluted.
It was a landmark legal battle against a corporate giant with political sway in high places--but because of that one judge's ruling, PG&E paid dearly.
When the film was over, I sat and thought about how things may have turned out very differently had that judge been appointed during the Trump era.
6
it wouldn't have turned out any differently because the Erin Brockovich case was filed in state court, not federal court
5
@GMooG
And if there was an appeal, it would have eventually ended up in a federal court.
3
Some time ago I read extensively about the long thought out plan by Republicans to change the make up of the courts. Did you really have to put this out again to rub the wound. It's disappointing that the Democratic party completely missed the boat on this one. We definitely need large systematic changes and I hope we get some resemblance of that in 2020. All our institutions are being undermined.
6
The stacking of the federal courts Federalist Society approved strict constructionists will prove to be one of the most enduring and unfortunate legacies of the Trump era.
Be prepared to watch as these Federalist Society-approved strict constructionists make quick work of roughly a century of civil rights jurisprudence, starting with Roe v. Wade.
4
The lawyers/appointed judges went to law school far before the current administration, it seems unfair to plant this title and article as though someone being right of center is immediately acting without ethical or outright criminal behavior. Perhaps the larger question is, can the seats be filled if arbitrarily stalled beforehand. And another, when there is a wave of vacancies, is there any effort to address the distribution of judges based on sex, years of service as a lawyer, educated as ivy or state, private vs government practice, court experience or not.
1
It was not mentioned in this piece if he was or is a member of the Koch funded federalist society. His actions are certainly lock step in that undemocratic organization.
Will we be able to stave off slavery under these elite new feudal lords? If not, when and how will the pendulum swing back to freedom?
Thomas Jefferson knew the how.
2
The Weekly could have included material from McGahn's early activities as seen in the PBS video,'Dark Money', where he is shown in his role on a 'voter-suppression' board which had influences on Montana's politics.
7
So do we blame McGahn then for leading US chaos and corruption and getting away with it?
2
The question is: Why has Congress done NOTHING in over 40 years to prevent this hostile takeover of our government by billionaire, white men (disguised as Christians)? The progressive “We The People” branch of our government (the Democrats) have allowed these sociopathic men to quietly change voting laws, implement outrageous gerrymandering (that favors a minority of white southern men), change tax laws, implant their own servants into our courts, change laws in their favor, and deregulate and dismantle consumer/ citizen protections and services. We are now a third-world kakistocracy and corporatocracy. I blame baby boomer Democrats for letting this happen.
3
Interesting to watch the eloquent and relatable public speaking by those at Elijah Cumming's Memorial Service the other day...what was even more interesting wa shearing the quiet comment by Chuck Todd...the gebtleman who mentioned to Kelly Anne Conway...what seems like a lifetime ago that...Alternative Facts are Not Facts! He mentioned that it was amazing to find that the current President of the US was not in attendance ...and that..he apparently wasn't missed !! Don McGahn's testimony could go a long way to changing public opinion and speeding up not only Impeachment but Trump's Removal from office. As we all know..once Trump's gone..he won't be missed...except by a few angry Republicans who will likely retire....and Fox Nation !! Other than them...no one cares if Trump gets mad on the way out...as long as he does go...OUT !!
4
“Who is Don McGahn , the Lawyer Behind Trump’s Court Makeover?”
Interesting. Trump didn't replace Democrat appointed judges, but two Republican ones, yet the article infers that it's a "makeover." Did the NYT have similar articles about Obama's court picks when a Democrat replaced not one, but two Republican appointed judges? Probably not since as with so many in the legal profession, they voted pretty solidly left. That's why Democrats almost always have an upper hand in the courts; it's professionally built-in.
27
I think you are only looking at the Supreme Court. The “make over” is at the lower levels.
13
@Dwight McFee Common sense is not the standard for courts because there is no definition to it - one man's common sense is another's nonsense. Court's apply the Constitution and laws so we have an ordered system.
2
@Independent Observer
I knew where you were coming from the second I read "Democrat-appointed judges." People like you do that to annoy people like me. I guess it's a requirement, in order to be part of the Republic Party -- such as it is.
7
While I don’t consider myself radical or hard left (Or at least “triggered”), I can’t stand the way this guy is rubbing my nose in it.
6
How come readers are always quick to point out when the NYT correctly and consistently uses the phrase "Trump appointee" or "Obama Appointee" to describe judges
The latter getting "it is an impartial judicary and being an Obama appointee is irrelevant" while the former raises the ire of the base and the courts are being stacked. Guess it isn't stacking when it is your guy doing the stacking.
13
We are in a war and have been since 1968. We have literally been attacked by Crusaders.
Like all Crusaders they do not care what they do or how it affects anyone as long as they can speak they will say it is all for god thus anything they do is OK.
The only real point of all Crusades throughout history and this one is no different, Is to get rich by theft and exert unlawful and abusive authority over innocent people who do not want you there.
14
If I wanted to watch TV I would turn on the TV. Instead I subscribed to a newspaper so I could read my news. Why am I seeing more and more filmed content?
7
@Jeanne Green The trend towards video content in online news is not a NY Times "shtick." All online news outlets do it, whether liberal or conservative. And many are worse than the Times.
And yes, I consider it annoying, especially with auto-play. But you can't just blame the Times. It's endemic.
3
@Jeanne Green Ditto. I'd recommend this a dozen times if I could. I think that the increasing emphasis on filmed and on-line content contributes to the mess our country is in. You don't retain information the same way and you don't get real depth or insight.
1
@ernieh1 PS: I failed to add a very compelling reason why online news media includes so much video, and it is because video is an excellent vehicle for ads and commercials.
2
At the risk of sounding like a complete 'conspiracy theory' zombie I am increasingly concerned about how many of the president's right wing enablers are known or likely members of the Roman Catholic organization Opus Dei. Pat Cipollone, McGhan's replacement in the White House, is almost certainly a member of this secret, ultra conservative society along with Leonard Leo of the conservative Federalist Society. Membership in Opus Dei is a closely guarded secret with the exception of the Board of Directors of the organization's "Catholic Information Center" in Washington. It is speculated that at least 3 and probably 4 Supreme Court Justices are members of this secret society founded in the 30's in Fascist Spain. There are less than 100,000 members worldwide; the society reports directly to the Pope in Rome. Is this how separation of Church and State is supposed to operate?
12
I have *zero* sympathy for anyone who complains about this. Sit on your couch rather than vote? This is what you get.
9
I cringed when Bolton summed up my feelings in this video.
Correction.
I cringed when ‘Bannon’ summed up my feelings.
This is the real danger of Republicans in power. The right is quick to scream ‘Term Limits!’ when it comes to politicians that don’t adhere to their views, but even quicker to snatch up as many lifetime judicial appointments as possible.
These people mold the way the law is interpreted, and therefore control the power.
6
Ironically, the Democrats are much more aggressive in using the Courts—the least democratic branch of government, to accomplish their goals. And the judicial philosophy of the Obama and Clinton judges they and their left wing advocates cherry-pick when filing their lawsuits is much more open to seeing the Constitution and existing law modified to achieve their view of justice. Meanwhile, the Bush and Trump judges are far more reluctant to inject their beliefs into settled precedent that does not support it—which is in part why Roe is still alive. In short, these new Trump judges will be a wall, not the aggressive, invading force that Warren or Bernie judges could become.
6
The 2016 election should have been about the Supreme and Federal judiciaries, and the 2020 is even.more.so.
3
It was., we just got distracted by Trump.
3
How many time have we heard elections have consequences. The left has been changing the shape of our courts for 40 yrs nominating political & activist judges. It’s about time someone pushed back & nominated judges who will follow actually the law.
5
@JOSEPH
Ah, you mean like the "laws" that protected segregation, that the evil Warren Court overturned. I'm old enough to remember when and why the deep South flipped Republican. Do you?
5
A conservative president nominated conservative judges - just like liberal presidents nominated liberal judges.
The first is horrible and unacceptable and corrupt, the latter is routine and reasonable.
Thanks for the clarification.
11
@John
You believe Trump is "conservative"?
4
Good point. Why don’t we just appoint judges.
1
@Bill,
keep up the good work,
lower case bill from nj
The reshaping of the judiciary will have profound effects - expect civil disobedience from our youth, as there should be. Brace yourselves for GenZ. They will not sit idly by while their rights are dashed. I hope I am around to see it.
1
"No question now what has happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which."
1
We all know about Trump’s Supreme Court appointments, and they are huge. But the vast majority of the other 98 appointments are trial judges. They spend almost all their time taking plea agreements, deciding motions and conducting trials. They are legal referees who rule whether this or that is admissible, which seldom involves politics. Their politics rarely come into play at all. The dramatic narration and music is way cool. But when it comes to trial judges, Brahms Lullaby would have been more appropriate.
6
The Founders chose lifetime appointments as a way of ensuring that judges ruled without "fear or favor", but they did so at a time when life expectancy was markedly shorter than it is today.
Limiting terms to 20 years is appealing but also has drawbacks. A judge with a few years remaining in his term could well be in the prime of his professional life - and amenable to offers of a soft place to land when s/he takes off the robes. There's no magic bullet for the problem except to try to remove politics from the equation.
2
@Richard C
In other words, affirmative action for liberals who can't win elections.
3
Thank you for at least finally acknowledging that this happened and virtually no one in the media (or in political leadership) paid attention to it. The important point isn't about anybody's legacy. It's about the negative consequences this will have on all of the people's right to at least have a voice. Bannon's reference to "Kafka-esque" is intentional, and these hollow men take great delight in the silencing and suffering that is to come.
2
The power of the courts grows as the ability of our elected Congress to pass legislation decreases. For example, the courts get to decide LGBTQ rights precisely because Congress fails to pass legislation guaranteeing equal rights to that same group. Unfortunately the stacking of the courts with conservative justices cannot be undone. What we, the electorate can do, is elect Senators and Representatives who will pass legislation which takes the judiciary out of the loop.
3
One of the things that strikes me is how the Republicans seem to understand how the gov’t works (ie: the President and Senate choose the court, so it’s important to have control of them), while them Dems seem to be constantly caught off guard and trying to catch up. Controlling the Court is important! For those who have forgotten their history lessons, FDR tried to pack the Court during his term. His effort failed. If the Dems and Libs want to remedy this, they need to spend less time complaining on social media, and more time compromising on (and getting out the vote for) a candidate who can win.
2
Fascinating how FDR's 1937 court-packing plan remains the subject of historical criticism, while Trump's court-packing program has happened under the media's radar and largely without criticism.
1
Love this series! Another intriguing episode and I can’t wait. The New York Times is the best.
I would love to watch this, alas, it’s either not available in my region or I have to pay extra for it. A little disappointing, to be honest.
Leftists wonder at evangelical Christian support for a guy like Trump. It's because, unlike the Left, the Right knows how to focus on the end game, knows how to organize from the bottom up, knows how to take the long view, knows how to address people in a language they understand, knows how to use what's out there to get what they want, knows how to weave a narrative that addresses people's needs and values as they perceive them, not as a candidate says they should perceive them.
Meanwhile, the current iteration of the Left lives in a world of aspirational fantasy, adept at little other than forming a circular firing squad.
3
The U. S. Senate along with the Electoral College and the Supreme Court of the United States are the primary triumvirate bulwarks against any individual American democratic expressions about any diplomatic, educational, historical, legal, military, political and socioeconomic policies and principles.
For everyone here questioning lifetime appointments to the courts, please realize that President Obama also reshaped the courts at both the district and circuit level. And President Obama was entitled to three lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court.
Who knows what impact the next President may have on the judiciary.
3
Now that a Federal Court has ruled that the House is conducting a legitimate impeachment of the President, there is no longer a faux excuse for McGahn refusing to appear before the House Judiciary Committee and be examined about his Mueller hearing testimony which did reveal deliberate obstruction of justice by President Trump. This needs to be put on the record while memories are fresh so that private citizen Trump can be indicted and held accountable in 2021.
3
Why allow Trump to stack the judiciary? This may give right wing ideologues veto power over government policies for decades to come.
The house has the power of the purse. The house should refuse to authorize one cent for Federal judicial positions. Sitting judges would continue to serve. The Constitution forbids Congress from reducing the salary of sitting judges. But positions would be defunded as they became vacant. Trump can't fill judicial positions that no longer exist. Salaries for prospective judges could be approved on a case by case basis, if Trump nominated candidates somewhat to the left of Justice Taney.
1
@Roy Turnage
That's a great idea -- as long as you can guarantee that Democrats will never lose the Presidency or control of Congress. Otherwise, the Reps will do exactly this to the liberal judges. Why don't Democrats ever think ahead?
3
The solution to this long term problem, once the Democrats regain power, is to enlarge the Supreme Court with liberal justices that can restore balance. The Supremes set the rules and tone for the entire federal judiciary and can modify... and mollify... a rightward thrust by often unqualified Trump era district and circuit court picks. Yes, the GOP can come with its own court packing scheme later, but hopefully we'll never see the current socially retrograde attitude again.
2
This swings back and forth over time. Still many judges appointed by Democrats, who were appointed based on their strong left leanings. Win elections (President and Senate) and we get to appoint judges. That is the way the Constitution has worked for over 200 years.
5
McGhan graduated from one of the most conservative oriented law schools in the US. It was founded by a man who had the most bizarre interpretation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. That says it all. It took the removal of the founder as Dean of the school to achieve ABA accreditation. Do not let that fact escape unknown. I was there and I know.
1
Stating that the judicial branch of government has been taken over by conservatives is accurate because the Republicans under Mitch McConnell's leadership refused to allow Obama to fill over 100 court vacancies and Trump is appointing and the Republican-controlled Senate confirming people for lifetime appointments to the bench based upon their ideology (biases) rather than their qualifications. In fact, many such judges have been rated unqualified by the American Bar Association. They have made a mockery of the four words etched in stone above the entrance of the Supreme Court building - “Equal Justice Under Law.”
1
”McGann push through lifetime appointments for more than 100 conservative judges”
So what...when a Democrat moves into the Oval Office in 2020, perhaps with a Democratic Senate (especially if The Madness of King Donald continues), then that president will push through lifetime appointments for more than 100 LIBERAL judges.
That’s just how this will go, ad infinitum - especially since this administration has made “ideology” the main judicial litmus test.
Unfortunately that will be the new normal.
2
There is no more evil enduring powerful stalwart barrier against any democracy in our divided limited different power constitutional republic of united states than federal judges nominated by an Electoral College President for lifetime appointments without the advice and consent of the House of Representatives.
1
Of course it is a white man who is reshaping our judiciary to cut back on women's reproductive rights and the right to control their own bodies and medical decisions, and on many other important areas of progress made in past decades in civil rights and individual rights (as opposed to corporate rights).
163
@Bj - In addition to McGahn and AG William Barr on the Supreme Court--Roman Catholics hold the majority: Chief Justice John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alioto, Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor.
4
This suggests there should be term limits for everything, especially judgeships. How sad in the end to realize that the law in fact can be both immoral and unethical and now given the new restrictions on polling sites in essence undemocratic.
This is the REAL TRUMP NIGHTMARE. Too bad we follow the British tradition of case law. Too bad that we are not educated to understand any of this or IMO members of Congress would not behave as they do -- irresponsibly and in lock step.
120
Rich, white, male, evangelical oligarchs win; females, people of color, poor people, non-theists, etc. (basically 75-80% of the US population) lose. And Americans though that a coup d'etat could not happen in America.
276
Brett Kavanaugh claimed to be "at the top of the class" in Y87. Yet the top 1% were offered Phi Beta Kappa membership junior year and the next 4% senior year. No Brett Kavanaugh either year. Clearly his opinion of himself and his scholastic record far exceed reality.
This is one small episode in a man's whose record on paper--Georgetown Prep, Yale College, Yale Law- appear far superior to his actual knowledge. It would seem through all phases of his educational life Mr. Kavanaugh was the party boy, not the scholar. His route was paved by parents' money and alumni status. He was a busy networker who got his name known, but not his expertise. In thess regards he has much in common with the President who nominated him and hence one can understand the connection.
187
“When he accepted the role of White House counsel, after Trump’s victory, McGahn set out to fill federal circuit court vacancies as quickly as possible...”
Without driven enablers like McGahn, Trump would have been sunk by his own incompetence and indolence and would never have been able to do such damage to our institutions. The idea that “ideologues” like Mr. McGahn (or Stephen Miller) have been able exert such outsize influence in this presidency, which will be felt for decades to come, is truly sickening.
324
@Susan
Jefferson had the cure for this sort of decay of the democratic process. Every 20 years or so, I believe he opined.
3
@Susan-Keep in mind McGahn's monied enablers who have included the Koch brothers with their enormous, out-sized influence. McGahn's much younger wife served as counselor to Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin. What I'm wondering is how this couple rationalizes what they do as enablers of themselves and others' criminality?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_McGahn
10
@Ann Likely not many know Mr McCain's wife had such an important job in the administration. How many re aware that even the WH attorney is part of a crony capitalist minority in the seat of power, running the country?
7
The White House counsel, who is legally charged with representing the OFFICE of the president, not the president himself, is responsible for this?
12
This certainly was a stunning article. Thanks to Don McGahn, Trump will never truly leave office.
How I wish that was an impeachable offense.
123
@Paula
Although trump is definitely culpable, this is the culmination of decades of GOP planning. Kochs,ALEC, and the McConnells of the world. Trump is too lazy and ignorant to research these judges.
8
This is presented as an "accomplishment, as something to be proud of.
The GOP now has TWO (2) Supreme Court justices of dubious character. Both have had ugly relationships with women.
The mystery is why we condone this.
160
@David Henry
I say we have 3 of dubious character...Neil G. Went along with McConnell etc. That shows a lack of character and moral fiber. He too cheated his way on to the court
9
@David Henry it's called low voter turn out along with weak leadership in the Democratic party. I hope we vote in great numbers for great change in 2020.
4
@David Henry Not to mention Gorsuch's actual record. And not to recall that his mother was such an odious head of the EPA under Reagan that he had to fire her for systematically trying to destroy the environment. Is it likely he will oppose Trump as he succeeds in what his mother failed to accomplish?
5
When Trump refuses to leave office, installing himself as President for Life, don't just blame McConnell and Gaetz. Save some blame for McGahn.
99
@edahmus, Then the people can learn to use their 2nd Amendment options because Trump and those gangsters are highly likely to form a dictatorship. Americans are fools if they do not make plans to deal with Trump if he and his gang try to install a police state or military dictatorship. That's what all his role models are doing. Do you think he got help from Russia to form a more perfect union in our Republic, for life, liberty and pursuit of happiness? Notice any democratic tendencies in Trump at all?
1
It is astonishing to me that so many otherwise intelligent and experienced men and women keep signing-on to ride the Donny Bus, and are then surprised when they find themselves betrayed and being cast beneath that bus. -C
42
This article shows the “Why”. Why Republicans are silent on the Presidents many faults.. this is the reason. Long after Trump is gone , the Republicans will have a majority in the Judicial. They don’t care about much else apparently. Reminds me of playing fiddle while Rome burns.
4
For a lawyer he has a strange view of justice for all. Does make me wonder who is funding all this right wing anti women agenda. I will not forget how he helped put Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.
93
@EJ Who is funding??? Look to the Catholic Church for clues.
3
@EJ
Mercers and Kochs. Traitors the lot of them.
7
Denial is not just a river in Egypt. McGahn needs to be held accountable for his complicity to an administration totally void of ethics and common decency. Although, since he was brought in to stack the deck with bigots on the federal bench, you can't deny: Mission Accomplished!
The one saving grace is these minions he helped get appointed, many were not supported from the American Bar Assoc, they lack the self control, temperament and moral standing to serve at all, let alone to a lifetime appointment. I trust they're incompetence will expose their flaws in time, and they too will be replaced.
I hope McGahn is held accountable for his arrogance to our system of legal justice.
213
@Gunslinger I would go so far as to propose that we should start monitoring these judges for impeachable offenses in order to flush the worst of them from the courts.
20
@Gunslinger
my thoughts exactly
that time will expose their incompetence
11
@Gunslinger no they will not be replaced..... it doesn’t quite work as you hope.....
2
Although this stacking of the federal judiciary with conservatives has been broadly known about for some time, the general public is largely unaware of the identities and judicial views of these judges. The mainstream media needs to report on this reactionary fallout of the Trump administration and how it could get worse if he wins a second term. And the public also needs a detailed accounting of Trump's systematic attempts to undo every accomplishment of his far more popular predecessor.
67
Start by not describing these trumpist members of the federal judiciary as conservatives. They are right wing reactionaries.
3
It undermines democracy when a single person has outsized influence. One person, one vote. Otherwise, we are a plutocracy.
54
This says it all about The Donald.
McGahn "signed on to the Trump campaign in 2015, at a time when few Washington insiders were willing to embrace the candidate."
McGahn then did everything to pick the kind of nominees for the Federal Courts that The Donald and his followers wanted and to get said nominees confirmed.
McGahn also gave honest advice in regard to the Mueller investigation. "McGahn's actions may have ultimately protected the president from an obstruction of justice charge. but details that appeared in Mueller's report angered the president."
That last phrase is what counts as far as The Donald is concerned. No matter how much one supports The Donald, the slightest disagreement could result in The Donald being angry. Then that person is out.
Are Pompeo, Barr, Mnuchin, etc. listing? If they are any kind of human beings, at some point they will disagree with The Donald. Then they will be out.
As far as the right wing judicial picks -- many of them will turn out to be pretty conservative but not as conservative was one might think. When people get a secure lifetime appointment to a post, they sometime surprise by their independence.
9
Anyone who deals with, as George Conway has pointed out, (listen to his great interview with Preet Bharara), the malignant narcissistic personality disordered individual, such as Trump is, loses some of their soul every day. I know from personal experience being married to one, which is like watching our entire country and the world lose our soul every day he’s in office. Like a tar baby of Uncle Remus...
28
@Aubrey
Pompeo, Barr, Mnuchin are with Trump to further their own agendas. They will, no doubt, remain thru the end.
Re: Mueller, McGahn saved Trump from his own self. and perhaps for McGahn's own agenda. Judge Ginsberg remains on the bench and hopefully for years to come.
Judge Gorsuch may balance out over time yet I hold no such hope for Kavanaugh. How many college aged young men do what he did and decades later without any remorse. No, Kavanaugh has a character disorder beyond repair.
Yes, judges need term limits. In my view, our country is currently beyond the tipping point.
@Lilly
Thanks for that insightful comment.
Best wishes and stay positive.
This is a consequence that most people in this country won't be aware of for a while and exactly the strategy that authoritarians use. They plant the seeds of dictatorship in the structure of the government and as people start to learn what has gone wrong they have less and less power to change it. I come from a country of dictatorship and corruption and sadly I can see exactly how a country moves to that direction. I just wonder if there is still hope to educate people enough to prevent this corruption to go further.
65
I try not to take politics too seriously, particularly since I’m an expatriate, but it breaks my heart that conservative republicans have taken over the Supreme Court.
Thinking about this too much is a sure path to getting depressed and cynical about the future of America.
54
This unfortunately is so true. We will be saddled with laws, that are for and written by corporate America. Those that will suffer the most, are the ones that can afford to suffer the least. Labor, small business and consumers will bear the brunt of rulings that will increase the power of the powerful, crush the lower classes and increase the wealth gap.
McConnell and his ilk, have done a good job of deceiving the voters into thinking what he has done is for them and their moral interests. Nothing could be further from the truth.
39
@Walter Ingram -
I agree. Corporations are writing the laws in many cases. Just look at the article published in the last 24 hours here in the NYTimes about how Boeing was responsible for the language in the FAA reauthorization bill that zapped the FAA’s ability to do effective design review. This became law, just as MCAS was being designed, and Boeing did such a great job with that review. Why, we haven’t had a Boeing 737 Max fall out of the sky since March this year, just after the second plane crashed using the new MCAS system.
2
I am constantly surprised by the number of people in key Republican positions of influence who foresaw
Trump’s victory in 2016. Had they been playing poker in Las Vegas, the house would have quietly escorted them to the door and slammed it behind them.
This is to suggest a cabal instigated by Putin. Mephistopheles chose his Fausts carefully but easily knowing so many would happily trade everything for money and power. The bill cannot come due too soon.
30
I'm disappointed that a man who took such a big part in reshaping the US courts has taken no role in reigning in the biggest threat to our Democracy since King George III. I view McGahn as an enabler of Trump, since he has done nothing to stop his actions. McConnell stonewalled all of Obama's judicial appointments, and McGahn was more than happy to fill them. This is not Democracy, this is partisan politics at its very worst. McGahn is the opposite of a patriot.
141
@edahmus what would one expect but for them to fill the courts. Why surprised. They will do anything!
4
I'm sure he sleeps very well. People without conscience sleep like rocks, completely unworried about the harm and abuse they cause. I'm hoping evidence is quietly being gathered, and he will ultimately pay the price he owes to the American people.
64
@ChesBay
He won’t pay the price through the justice system, because he has stacked the courts with those who think like him (and not like most Americans on any given subject).
5
I know McGahn gets a lot of praise fir stopping trump from some illegal action and for cooperating with Mueller. But to me he is also a big part of the problem.
Why would he tell government employees to go ahead and sign illegal non disclosure agreements with trump. Seems to me people doing that when we taxpayers, not trump pay their salaries, enabled the stonewalling from the administration. Most people cannot afford the risk of violating an NDA Orbthe cost if defending against a trump arbitration.
Why would he conjure up all the lies and craziness to ensure the approval of Kavanaugh to a lifetime appoint to SCOTUS? He had to know how bad Kavanaugh is for the country regardless of one’s side of the aisle.
And then he walks away and leaves us with the burden of trump corruption. McGahn knew how to protect himself but he did not put the country first. Hopefully history will document the harm he has done to our country.
43