Biden, Obama Judges Make Up the Bulk of Rulings Against Trump Policies

Of the lower court judges who have blocked President Donald Trump’s executive orders and other administration actions since he returned to office in January, Democrat appointees have outnumbered Republican appointees by about 3-1. The ratio is evidence of a common practice called “forum shopping” that is done with highly politicized litigation.

Forum shopping is where plaintiffs in a lawsuit seek to have their cases heard by certain judges in certain judicial districts who they believe will be more friendly to their arguments and more likely to rule in their favor.

Federal district judges have blocked Trump’s executive actions on immigration policy, election integrity, transgender policy, and federal employees, as well as initiatives by the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency. 

Of 61 lower court judges who have ruled against Trump—in some cases more than once—49 were appointed by Democrats. Of those, former President Barack Obama appointed 21, former President Joe Biden appointed 19, former President Bill Clinton appointed nine, and President Jimmy Carter appointed one.

The others were appointed by Republican presidents, including Trump, who appointed five of the judges who ruled against his policies. 

These numbers are based on published reports and an artificial intelligence analysis. 

Notably, some Democrat appointees who halted Trump’s policies in one case sided with his administration in another case. 

For example, Obama-appointed D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan became known before Trump won a second term for presiding over the criminal case against him for challenging the 2020 election outcome. 

Chutkan ruled against Trump in two separate cases over his clawing back of federal climate grants from nongovernmental organizations yet left in effect Trump’s policy in cases involving the U.S. Agency for International Development and DOGE, according to data from The Associated Press. 

In another example, Biden-appointed Judge Deborah Boardman of the federal District Court of the District of Maryland blocked Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship; however, in a separate case of federal employee unions trying to block DOGE actions, she left a Trump policy in effect, according to an AP tracker of Trump litigation. 

As of Tuesday, federal courts have blocked or partially blocked 88 Trump initiatives but allowed 49 to stand, according to The Associated Press. Another 78 cases are pending. 

Since Trump took office in January, there have been 40 nationwide injunctions against his policies in cases that started in a federal district court. 

Nationwide injunctions are the “ideal temptation for forum shopping,” said Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, a conservative legal group. 

“Forum shopping is nothing new, but the numbers demonstrate, (a) it has been taken to new heights, and (b) the [left-leaning advocacy groups] are very effective at it,” Levey told The Daily Signal. “You can find a plaintiff anywhere, so there is an open field for forum shopping. And, ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ is real. Judges are people with emotions, and a number of judges will rule against Trump no matter what.”

Trump was recently critical of Judge Timothy Reif, whom he appointed in his first term to the U.S. Court of International Trade. Reif joined an Obama appointee and a Ronald Reagan appointee to strike down most of Trump’s tariffs. 

Forum shopping is incentivised in part by the Senate tradition of what is known as blue slips, said John Malcolm, director of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. 

A blue slip is where both senators from a state, regardless of party, are asked to initially approve or disapprove of a president’s judicial nominee from that state. A senator who approves of the nominee returns the blue slip to the Senate Judiciary Committee. If a senator does not approve, he withholds his blue slip, and the nominee may not be considered by the committee. While it’s not legally binding, senators have for the most part honored the tradition.

“Blue slips are honored as vetoes for district judges, there is debate whether blue slips should apply to appellate court judges,” Malcolm told The Daily Signal. “Both parties honor this system.”

Conservative-leaning groups also forum shop when suing a Democrat administration, Malcolm said. But, he added, Democrat-appointed judges are more likely to impose nationwide injunctions rather than injunctions that are limited to only the litigants involved in the case the judge is presiding over or only to the geographical district in which the judge presides, which has traditionally been the practice for injunctions. 

Among the most famous judges involved in these cases stopping Trump’s policies has been James Boasberg, an Obama appointee to the federal District Court of the District of Columbia, who issued orders prohibiting certain deportations.

Among the other judges involved in these cases are Biden appointee Judge Brendan Hurson of the District of Maryland. He blocked Trump’s order banning so-called sex-change surgeries for minors. Judge Brian Murphy, also a Biden appointee of the District of Maryland, ordered the return to the United States of a Guatemalan illegal immigrant the administration had deported.  

The post Biden, Obama Judges Make Up the Bulk of Rulings Against Trump Policies appeared first on The Daily Signal.