Despite the willingness of some Trump-appointed judges to rule against Trump’s bogus claims that 20 there was widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election, many analysts continued to view Trump judges with suspicion. This suspicion became more acute when Trump-appointed judge, Aileen Cannon, defied most legal reasoning and ruled in favor of Trump. Most legal analysts considered Cannon’s ruling so unreasonable that many observers believed that her ruling was corrupt. A phrase in her ruling that ascribed special privileges to a former President supported this view.
Based on Judge Cannon’s behavior, many observers inferred that the approximately 234 judges appointed by Trump should be viewed with suspicion. Several rulings by Trump-appointed judges also raise questions about the objectivity or competence of those judges. One judge, for example, found that a peaceful protestor shot with bean bag pellets resulting in the loss of hearing and vision, did not find excessive use of force. Another Trump-appointed judge ruled against an airline employee who was by the airline after complaining that a supervisor compromised safety by curtailing the production of a safety manual for pilots.
Reviewers who have looked at the Trump judges have found them to be very conservative (more so than judges appointed by George W. Bush), younger, had spent more time in politics, and had less private-sector experience. Together these characteristics suggest that rulings by Trump-appointed judges will be outside the bounds of other federal judges. If we want a federal judiciary that we can rely on for sound and just decisions, we must mitigate the influence of the 30 percent or so of Trump-appointed judges. We cannot continue denying the toxic impact of Trump judges.
Based on Judge Cannon’s behavior, many observers inferred that the approximately 234 judges appointed by Trump should be viewed with suspicion. Several rulings by Trump-appointed judges also raise questions about the objectivity or competence of those judges. One judge, for example, found that a peaceful protestor shot with bean bag pellets resulting in the loss of hearing and vision, did not find excessive use of force. Another Trump-appointed judge ruled against an airline employee who was by the airline after complaining that a supervisor compromised safety by curtailing the production of a safety manual for pilots.
Reviewers who have looked at the Trump judges have found them to be very conservative (more so than judges appointed by George W. Bush), younger, had spent more time in politics, and had less private-sector experience. Together these characteristics suggest that rulings by Trump-appointed judges will be outside the bounds of other federal judges. If we want a federal judiciary that we can rely on for sound and just decisions, we must mitigate the influence of the 30 percent or so of Trump-appointed judges. We cannot continue denying the toxic impact of Trump judges.