Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: Unhappy with the Supreme Court? Your vote for president could make it worse

Published

on

Opinion: Unhappy with the Supreme Court? Your vote for president could make it worse

By now it shouldn’t need to be said: When Americans vote for a president, the federal courts are on the ballot as well. Yet too few voters, especially among those in the decisive middle, make their choice with that in mind.

Think about it: The issues that voters do care most about in this election year — immigration, reproductive rights, the economy and government regulation, gun control — increasingly are decided in federal courts reshaped by Donald Trump, including the Supreme Court, because of the paralyzing dysfunction in Congress.

Opinion Columnist

Jackie Calmes

Jackie Calmes brings a critical eye to the national political scene. She has decades of experience covering the White House and Congress.

Advertisement

Add to those perennial issues the novel one of 2024: Trump’s legal accountability. Here, the judiciary’s impact couldn’t be more clear. Foot-dragging — by the Supreme Court, where three Trump appointees sit, and at the Florida district court where a Trump-appointed judge presides — has all but assured that voters won’t get criminal verdicts before election day on the former president’s efforts to overturn his 2020 defeat and to squirrel away top-secret documents.

We’ve learned the hard way: It matters whether Trump or President Biden is picking federal judges, just as it matters which party controls the Senate and has the power to confirm them.

Only since the 2022 Dobbs decision overturning a half-century of abortion rights have Democrats begun to wise up to what Republicans have long known: With executive and legislative power, your party can put its stamp on the unelected third branch of government, the judiciary, and that legacy can long outlast the politicians. As Trump lackey Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina recently said of 2024, “One of the big issues on the ballot is trying to have a more conservative judiciary.”

Advertisement

Be forewarned, Democrats. Flip the script — mobilize your voters around this issue.

Here are the stakes: If Biden wins, he can continue the unfinished work of trying to offset the right-wing tilt (and white male dominance) that Trump gave to the courts by naming more judges in a single term than any president other than Jimmy Carter. Biden’s effort could well be slowed if, as widely expected, Republicans take control of the Senate and gum up the confirmation works.

But better slow action in the Senate on Biden appointees than a return, if Trump wins, to a fast track for extreme right-wingers. Such as Trump-appointee Aileen Cannon, the novice Florida district judge (mis)handling the former president’s trial involving classified material. Or Matthew Kacsmaryk, the Texas district judge and culture warrior who last year sought to outlaw mifepristone, one of two drugs used for the medication abortions that account for more than half of all abortions in the country. He filled his opinion with the jargon of antiabortion activists, writing at one point that mifepristone, which is used just up to 10 weeks’ pregnancy, “ultimately starves the unborn human until death.” The Supreme Court will hear that case March 26.

Another consideration for voters: While a reelected Biden likely wouldn’t be able to alter the imbalance at a Supreme Court between six archconservatives and three liberals, he could prevent it from getting even worse.

None of the justices are expected to retire soon. However, the two oldest (and most conservative), Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., are in their mid-70s and could opt to step aside if Trump wins, court watchers speculate, so that he could replace them with like-minded jurists young enough to serve for decades. (In normal times, we might already be rid of Thomas through impeachment or resignation, given his well-documented ethical lapses and his refusal to recuse himself from Jan. 6 cases despite his wife’s complicity in efforts to overturn Biden’s election. But these aren’t normal times.)

Advertisement

When Trump reluctantly left the White House, his judicial picks made up one-third of the Supreme Court, nearly one-third of the 13 appeals courts and more than a quarter of the 94 district courts. Because relative youth and proven Republican bona fides were the job criteria set by Trump and the trio to whom he outsourced his court-packing — Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, then-White House Counsel Don McGahn and former Federalist Society leader Leonard Leo — Trump judges likely will be prominent on the federal bench well past midcentury.

“Topping Trump seems impossible” was the headline last fall on an analysis of Biden’s judicial appointments by Russell Wheeler, of the Brookings Institution, who tracks the courts. In an update in January, however, Wheeler said that although Biden probably won’t top Trump’s one-term total for judges on the appeals courts, he could match him on district court judges.

Should Biden fall short, it won’t be for lack of trying. More than Democratic predecessors Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, he has made judicial nominations a priority in the wake of Team Trump’s single-minded courts makeover. Better late than never?

Biden was, after all, a leader on the Senate Judiciary Committee for years; he knows his stuff. (Except we do have him to thank for Thomas’ confirmation three decades ago.) And Senate Democrats, with their one-vote majority, have helped. Together, they set a record for confirmations in a president’s first year in office, though the pace was only “so-so,” as Wheeler put it, by the end of last year.

One problem is that Biden didn’t inherit nearly as many vacancies as Trump did. McConnell had thwarted confirmation of many nominees in Obama’s final year — most famously, Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court — so Trump was able to fill the seats. Then in Trump’s final year, McConnell nearly made good on a vow to “leave no vacancy behind”; he even rammed 14 nominees to confirmation after Trump lost the 2020 election, the first time a defeated president’s nominees were confirmed since 1897.

Advertisement

Now Democrats must copy McConnell’s zeal. Fifty-seven judgeships are open, and Biden has picked nominees for just a third of them. For one thing, he and Senate leaders are being too deferential to Republicans about whom to nominate for red-state vacancies. Just get ‘em all filled before election day, lest Trump and a Republican-run Senate once again inherit a bonanza of seats.

If the republic is lucky, voters will give Biden another four years to keep at it. And that’s more likely if enough of them remember: The bench is on the ballot too.

@jackiekcalmes

Advertisement

Politics

Trump heads to NATO as tensions simmer with Europe

Published

on

Trump heads to NATO as tensions simmer with Europe

The leaders of Europe are bracing for another turbulent summit with President Trump this week as NATO members gather for their annual meeting in the Turkish capital.

European diplomats view Trump’s decision to attend as a positive sign of his continued commitment to the alliance. But the president’s grievances with several European governments over their refusal to join the U.S. war with Iran have cast a pall over a summit already strained by Trump’s wavering support for the continent.

The secretary-general of the transatlantic alliance, Mark Rutte, told reporters on Monday that Trump had aired his resentments in a recent phone call. But Rutte countered with a mix of flattery and countervailing facts that has thus far kept Trump engaged.

While Trump has accused European leaders of denying U.S. forces access to allied bases for takeoffs and refueling during the war, Rutte noted that about 5,000 sorties supporting Operation Epic Fury launched from European airfields. And last Friday, France and Britain committed to a joint military mission with Oman to support freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz — “an extremely important development,” Rutte said.

At last year’s summit, held in The Hague, all NATO member states — with the exception of Spain — agreed to spend 5% of their GDP on defense by 2035, marking a significant increase in historic spending goals for modern Europe. The pledge is divided into two categories, with 3.5% of spending allocated to core military requirements, and the rest committed to a broad set of security-related investments.

Advertisement

Trump’s tough love on the alliance “is, I think, bringing NATO closer together,” the secretary general told reporters.

“You could argue that he is the first president of the U.S. since Eisenhower who was able to come to this situation where the Europeans and the Canadians will spend the same as the Americans” on security, Rutte said. “This equalization was a wish for 50, 60 years, and now it’s happening — I think in large part due to his leadership.”

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte speaks to reporters Monday ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey.

(Hussein Malla / Associated Press)

Advertisement

In a video message posted on social media Monday, Trump’s ambassador to NATO, Matthew Whitaker, said the summit this week would serve as a “report card” to determine whether countries were beginning to fulfill their commitments from last year.

He offered a note of optimism and suggested the president’s goal is to enhance, rather than undermine, the alliance.

“The United States will be here, but we also need our allies to be here. We cannot do it alone, and the American taxpayer should no longer bear the burden,” Whitaker said.

A White House schedule for Trump’s trip lists bilateral meetings with Rutte and the leaders of Turkey, Syria and Ukraine, in between alliance-wide meals and conferences.

Ukraine will remain at the top of the agenda, Trump told reporters Monday, expressing hope that the war could soon come to an end after four brutal years of fighting.

Advertisement

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused the greatest loss of life in Europe since World War II, resulting in more than 1 million casualties, including an estimated 600,000 dead. Since Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion in 2022, following his covert invasions of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and eastern regions in 2014, Russian forces have captured roughly 12% of Ukraine’s territory.

The war has settled into a deadly stalemate since a 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive failed to break Russian defensive lines. While Russian forces have occasionally advanced, they have only managed to hold marginal gains along the front, at tremendous cost.

In recent weeks, however, expanded Ukrainian drone and missile capabilities have shifted the dynamic, striking military production sites deep inside Russia and targets near Moscow, bringing the war more directly into the Russian public consciousness and raising questions in the Russian capital whether the war effort is sustainable.

Ukraine’s boldness has impressed the Trump administration, Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, told the Financial Times this week.

“I think he does feel pressure,” Trump said of Putin, addressing reporters in the Oval Office before departing for Turkey on Monday.

Advertisement

The president referred to an ongoing U.S. effort to end the war, a goal that has remained elusive for Trump since returning to office.

“I think we’re getting much closer than people realize,” he said. “President Putin wants it to end, I will tell you that. Very strongly. Had a good call. And President Zelensky actually wants it to end now.”

“We’re going to be going to NATO, and we’re going to be talking about it,” Trump added. “And I think we’re going to get it ended. It’s been terrible.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

ICE renews hunt for El Chapo’s last two fugitive sons with massive reward

Published

on

ICE renews hunt for El Chapo’s last two fugitive sons with massive reward

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

“Two down and two to go” blared the new wanted poster targeting the two remaining fugitive sons of infamous Mexican cartel kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman-Loera, who is serving life-plus-30-years in Colorado’s federal supermax prison.

On Monday, ICE posted a new wanted poster for two members of “Los Chapitos” — Ivan Archivaldo Guzman Salazar and Jesus Alfredo Guzman Salazar, two of El Chapo’s sons with his first wife, Alejandrina Maria Salazar-Hernandez.

After El Chapo’s final capture in 2016, control of the powerful Sinaloa Cartel shifted to Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada. Following Zambada’s arrest during the Biden administration, leadership passed to Guzman’s four sons.

MEXICAN SENATOR ACCUSES SHEINBAUM OF SHIELDING ‘NARCO-POLITICIANS’ AFTER US CARTEL INDICTMENT

Advertisement

Both the Trump administration in the U.S. and the Sheinbaum administration in Mexico have said they are focused on cracking down on cartel’s new leadership.

“Two down and two to go with $10 million reward,” the wanted poster read, with Xs over the faces of the already captured Joaquin Guzman Lopez and Ovidio Guzman Lopez.

The two captured Chapitos are reportedly cooperating with authorities and have not yet been sentenced, but Ivan and Jesus remain “armed and dangerous,” according to ICE.

ICE NABS ACCUSED MS-13 KILLER HIDING IN NORTHERN VIRGINIA SUBURB

El Chapo Guzman arrives in the United States after his capture in Mexico. (AP File)

Advertisement

The two fugitives are charged with conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance and operating a continuing criminal enterprise.

Two of Guzman’s four sons have already been captured through Operation Take Back America, an initiative seeking the “total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations” in order to protect U.S. communities from violent crime.

U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Andrew Boutros said in a recent statement that efforts to capture El Chapo’s sons are the latest steps “in our efforts to bring to justice drug lords and other dangerous criminals who poison the American public with illegal and harmful drugs and who otherwise engage in violence and corruption to carry out their and their enterprises’ wide-reaching criminal activities.”

US MILITARY KILLS TWO ALLEGED NARCO-TERRORISTS IN LATEST EASTERN PACIFIC STRIKE ON DRUG-TRAFFICKING VESSEL

Joaquin “Shorty” Guzman, center, is escorted by soldiers during a presentation at the Navy’s airstrip in Mexico City. (Reuters/Edgard Garrido)

Advertisement

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

In his plea agreement, Guzman Lopez admitted that he and his cartel associates committed violence against law enforcement officials, rival drug traffickers and members of their own organization to protect the Sinaloa Cartel’s trafficking operations.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital reached out to ICE and DHS for additional comment and information on the mission to capture the two at-large Chapitos.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump says he disputed U.S. star player’s suspension, calling it ‘stain’ on World Cup

Published

on

Trump says he disputed U.S. star player’s suspension, calling it ‘stain’ on World Cup

President Trump said Monday that he called the president of FIFA to dispute a red card that would have barred the American striker Folarin Balogun from playing in Monday’s elimination game with Belgium, acknowledging an extraordinary intervention by a head of state in the sport’s disciplinary process.

“I asked for a review because I didn’t think it was a foul,” Trump told reporters during an event in the Oval Office. “I am good at this stuff. I didn’t think it was a foul. I thought it was two great athletes that crashed into each other and got entangled.”

FIFA subsequently rescinded Balogun’s suspension, the first time the governing body has reversed a red-card penalty during a World Cup in 64 years. Belgium has protested the decision, and a hearing is scheduled for Monday to determine whether Balogun’s reinstatement will stand.

Trump said it would be a “stain” on the World Cup to let the penalty stand, and even called the referee who issued the card “suspect” with a questionable past, though he did not provide evidence to support the accusation.

While many in the United States joined the president in celebrating the reversal, others blasted its adverse impact on the integrity of the sport.

Advertisement

The Belgium team has protested the penalty reversal, with the country’s soccer federation saying it was “astonished” by the ruling.

“We are not defending the national team or federation. We are defending football,” Belgian coach Rudi Garcia said.

The episode has drawn attention to Trump’s close relationship with Gianni Infantino, the president of FIFA. In December, Infantino presented Trump with the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize, an award the governing body created after Trump was passed over for the Nobel Peace Prize. That decision is now the subject of an ethics complaint, backed by members of the European Parliament, who argue it compromised FIFA’s political neutrality.

Trump appeared to downplay the significance of his call to Infantino.

“I can’t tell him what to do, and I don’t believe he made the decision,” Trump said. “I think it was a committee that made the decision, and they made the right decision, because number one, it wasn’t a foul, and you want to see a game with your best players.”

Advertisement

But he said it would be “very unfair” and “terrible” to not let Balogun play. He said it would be the equivalent of barring Argentina’s Lionel Messi or Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo — both global superstars — because they “ran” or “bumped” into someone on the field.

“We have to have our best players, and they have to have their best players. And if we win or we lose, it’s fair,” Trump said. “Let’s say we lost [Balogun] and we lose the game — it would be a terrible thing.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending