With an opportunity to put a modest, long-term court reform initiative ahead of short-term partisan interests, President Biden opted for the latter—and may thereby have ended up hurting both. Me on the JUDGES Act veto in today's bonus issue of "One First": www.stevevladeck.com/p/bonus-114-... - ThreadSky

stevevladeck.bsky.social • 140 days ago

With an opportunity to put a modest, long-term court reform initiative ahead of short-term partisan interests, President Biden opted for the latter—and may thereby have ended up hurting both.

Me on the JUDGES Act veto in today's bonus issue of "One First":

https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/bonus-114-president-bidens-misbegotten

Comments

turnitup5000db.bsky.social•139 days ago

If it’s that important I’m sure the republicans will reintroduce it, even if it’s as nothing more than a power grab.

iamthebadassador.bsky.social•138 days ago

Gopers didn't care about putting judges in seats during Obama's term but howdy did they when trunk was in office. They didn't care about increasing the number until Trump was going to be POTUS. I'm with Biden on this.
Let's wait and see if we are going to have free and fair elections again

xiruxi.bsky.social•140 days ago

Nah

lpoldervaart.bsky.social•140 days ago

Biden absolutely did the right thing.

jamespio.bsky.social•140 days ago

You seem to think we are still operating in normal times, and not facing down a tyrant who wishes to steal our nation. It is so far past the time to decide which side you are on. You should know that more than most.

dbenji.bsky.social•140 days ago

Right. It just serves to reinforce the abuse going back to Garland nomination and GOP abuses. This veto might “feel” good but does not help in the long run.

michaelbrennick.bsky.social•140 days ago

It’s about making Republicans stick to the deals they make and consequences when they break them .

Yes and the long term consequence isn’t good, but enough if Democrats looking for good outcomes and being the “ good governance” party.

satchel150.bsky.social•140 days ago

Exactly. Once the Republicans start putting national interests ahead of their political interests, Democrats can do the same. Until such time, fight fire with fire.

satchel150.bsky.social•140 days ago

Thoughts on the House holding off on voting on the bill until after the election? Would they have voted in favor of it if Harris had won? Of course not. Yet Democrats are always expected to do the right thing. Biden was right to veto the bill and not allow Trump to install more MAGA judges.

dunkelman.bsky.social•140 days ago

Exactly. Democrats are supposed to play by the rule and the Republicans can just do what they want. Enough of this nonsense.

boringlittlef.bsky.social•140 days ago

Nope. Sorry. He did the right thing.

laurarbelin.bsky.social•140 days ago

Can Republicans include language creating federal judgeships in one of their reconciliation bills next year, because it requires new spending to create District Court positions?
Because if so, this veto may have allowed Republicans to give Trump 66 positions to fill in the next two years.

nickfish.me•140 days ago

Unclear if it would pass muster under the Senate's Byrd rule for being only "merely incidental" to the budget. Granted, the Senate could just override the parliamentarian, but who knows if Murkowski, Collins, etc would go for that.

phoenixwomanmn.bsky.social•139 days ago

They wouldn't because they are aware that they could be back in the minority again as soon as 2026.

wellestarr1.bsky.social•140 days ago

My man, you are not a wartime consigliere.

noahdahl.bsky.social•140 days ago

So long as the Chief Justice refuses to prioritize ethics, I think Biden did the right thing in refusing to reward his judiciary with more judges. I only wish he would have made that more explicit in his reasoning.

scotstirling.bsky.social•140 days ago

Elections have consequences. Biden's veto also serves long-term interests by slowing Trump's corruption of the judiciary.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply