Senate Republicans, recognizing that President Trump’s chances for filling federal court vacancies will be slim under a new Democratic majority, intend to muscle through about two dozen federal judges before losing control of the Senate in early January.
Democrats promise to do whatever they can to slow the lame-duck judicial juggernaut that began Tuesday as the Senate Judiciary Committee approved four nominees and sent them to the floor for consideration. But their ability to block it is limited, since Republicans can win Senate confirmations as long as they are willing to devote the necessary time to doing so and can deliver a majority vote.
Top Senate Republicans say confirming judges is a top priority for them and the president, and that they will keep the Senate in session as long as needed to seat as many on the federal bench as possible. Aides say up to 25 nominees are in the pipeline, including four appeals court candidates and 21 for district courts. They estimate that doing so will consume considerable floor time and keep the Senate in session well into December.
The group includes two nominees to fill vacancies in Texas, whose names were hastily added to the list last week — one without going through the typical review process by senators — after Democrat James Talarico won a Senate seat there last week. Democrats suggested the White House was rushing their nominations in a bid to install them before Mr. Talarico arrived in the Senate and gained the power to derail home-state judicial nominees.
Senator John Thune, the South Dakota Republican serving as majority leader until January, said members of his party were committed to staying in Washington to seat as many judges and push through as much Republican-backed legislation as they can before being relegated to the minority after last week’s sweeping defeats.
“We’re going to make the most of the time that we’ve got,” Mr. Thune said. “Our conference is committed to being here to do whatever it takes to get as much done as we can.”
The nominees, all conservatives, would fill court vacancies in states represented by Republicans, since Democrats have the power under longstanding Senate tradition to block court picks for their states whom they find objectionable. They have largely resisted those proposed by the White House.
The Texas nominees, in particular, have drawn attention because of the timing of their nominations and the political shift that took place in the state last week.
“We are going to do our best to make sure that Talarico is not denied the basic right of a senator to decide whether a federal district court judge goes forward,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.
The new Texas district court nominees are James Sullivan, a member of the Texas Supreme Court who lost his bid for re-election to that court last week, and Elliott Gaiser, a top Justice Department official who just resigned his job in the agency’s Office of Legal Counsel.
Mr. Durbin called Mr. Gaiser’s connections to the state of Texas tangential, and said that he had issued “unhinged” opinions while serving in the Justice Department.
Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, noted that Mr. Gaiser’s nomination did not go through the usual Texas review process established by him and Senator Ted Cruz, his fellow Texas Republican. He said that he and Mr. Cruz had offered the White House the names of other qualified candidates for the opening in the state’s Northern District.
“I will look at his record and make a decision,” said Mr. Cornyn, noting that it was unusual to “airdrop” in a nominee at the last minute.
Mr. Durbin also accused Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee, of violating some customary practices of the panel by hurriedly scheduling hearings and not allowing enough time to review paperwork about the nominees. Mr. Grassley dismissed those complaints, saying that Democrats took similar steps in the past and that he broke no committee rules.
“The chairman has always had discretion to set hearings,” Mr. Grassley said. “This committee has always shortened timelines when circumstances warrant it.”
Because of Senate rules changes, judicial nominations are no longer subject to a 60-vote threshold. With Republicans still holding a 53-47 majority, they have the power to overcome any Democratic procedural objections. Federal district court nominees can move through the Senate on an expedited basis in one day once they reach the floor. But those up for an appeals court position can take multiple days to confirm. Democrats can also force other procedural votes to slow the process, and say they will do so.
“We should spare no effort to stop judges who will be on the bench long after we are gone,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut and a member of the Judiciary Committee, about the nominees for lifetime appointments. “I’m going to do everything I can to fight them.”
Democrats were being encouraged to do so by progressive groups who say they should try to hold off Senate Republicans and the president after they were repudiated at the polls.
“The outgoing Republican majority has no mandate to use its final weeks in power to ram through even more extremist judicial nominees who will put loyalty to the thoroughly rejected MAGA agenda above all else,” Svante Myrick, president of People for the American Way, said in a statement. “Democrats must do all they can to stop this power grab.”
Even if Republicans confirm all 25, it would still put the number slightly short of the 84 judges both Mr. Trump and President Joseph R. Biden Jr. each installed on the courts in the first two years of their terms, according to Mr. Durbin’s office.
The post Republicans Begin Aggressive Lame-Duck Push to Install Trump Judges appeared first on New York Times.
