President Trump is winning again.
Despite the mainstream media and Democrats continuing to fight him at nearly every turn, the president achieved a historic milestone on Thursday when the Senate confirmed his 100th judicial nominee.
According to the Daily Caller, Trump has witnessed the confirmations of 102 federal judges that he has appointed, including “63 trial judges, 37 appeals judges, and two Supreme Court justices.”
Trump’s 37 circuit court nominations is a historic and unprecedented figure. Former President Barack Obama only had 17 nominees confirmed and former President George W. Bush only had 30 nominees confirmed at this same time in their respective terms, the Daily Caller reports.
“Today marks an incredible milestone as the Senate confirmed President Trump’s 100th judicial nominee,” Judicial Crisis Network chief counsel Carrie Severino said on Thursday. “This is a big win for the country to have judges who fairly apply the law and adhere to the Constitution sitting on our nation’s most prized courts.”
The Daily Caller continues:
The Senate reached the 100-judge mark with the confirmation of Rodolfo “Rudy” Armando Ruiz to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on a 90-8 vote. Ruiz is a state court judge and a member of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal group that advises the White House of judgeships. The confirmations of Raul Manuel Arias-Marxuach to the District of Puerto Rico and Joshua Wolson to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania followed.
With 37 appointments to the circuit courts, Trump and GOP lawmakers have set a record for appellate confirmations. By way of comparison, former President Barack Obama had 18 circuit court appointments at this juncture of his presidency, while former President George W. Bush had 30.
The nation’s 12 circuit courts hear appeals from the federal trial courts. Since the Supreme Court reviews approximately 75 disputes each term, the circuit panels render the final decision in the overwhelming majority of federal cases.
That astounding clip was enabled by a sequence of changes Republican lawmakers made to Senate process over bitter Democratic objections. The Republican-led Senate Judiciary Committee has held at least a dozen hearings in which multiple circuit nominees testified before the panel, a break from prior practice in which appellate nominees generally appeared before the committee one at a time.
According to the report, most of Trump’s judicial selections have been a recast or refilling of Republican judges in previously-held Republican seats.
Some of his appointments, however, have led to the flip of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court. Check it out:
While progress has been slow on left-leaning benches, Trump may flip an important appeals court to majority Republican appointees by year’s end. Judge Christopher Droney of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a Bill Clinton appointee, announced in April that he will take senior status, a form of quasi-retirement that allows judges to leave regular service while still participating in cases on a limited basis.
With Droney’s departure, there will be four vacancies on the 2nd Circuit, though Michael Park’s imminent confirmation will reduce that figure to three. If Trump nominees fill the three remaining seats, GOP appointees will have a 7-6 majority on the 2nd Circuit, which covers Connecticut, New York, and Vermont.
All told, Trump’s nominees have indisputably rotated a more conservative cast into the federal courts, according to University of Richmond School of Law Professor Carl Tobias, who studies judicial selection.
“Trump’s judges have made most circuit courts more conservative, except for the Boston and Washington, D.C. based appeals courts,” Tobias said. “The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is the only panel that has ‘flipped’ to majority Republican appointees.”
The Daily Caller reports there are many more court vacancies that Trump can fill, including 82 judicial emergencies that need timely fills.Note: The author of this article has included commentary that expresses an opinion and analysis of the facts.