EXECUTIVE V. JUDICIARY CONTINUES | NYT Ed Board Responds To Trump’s Tweets
February 9, 2017
GORSUCH GETS OUT FRONT
|In a meeting yesterday with SENATOR RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Supreme Court nominee JUDGE NEIL GORSUCH called PRESIDENT TRUMP’S tweets attacking the judiciary “demoralizing” and “disheartening.” On Tuesday, Gorsuch also told SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER that an attack on his fellow judges is an attack on all. Trump’s multi-day attacks on courts and specific judges (read U.S. District Judge JAMES ROBART of Washington state) follows the hold Robart placed on Trump’s travel ban.
TWEET DU JOUR
|From @realDonaldTrump – “Sen.Richard Blumenthal, who never fought in Vietnam when he said for years he had (major lie),now misrepresents what Judge Gorsuch told him?”
YOU TAKE IT BACK RIGHT NOW
|A member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and responsible for reporting JUDGE GORSUCH’S rebuke of PRESIDENT TRUMP’S recent comments attacking the judiciary, SENATOR RICHARD BLUMENTHAL just became the latest victim of the president’s Twitter account. Blumenthal continues to stand by his account of Gorsuch’s comments, nothing White House officials have also confirmed it. “I am not about to try to explain the president’s tweets,” he told CNN. Blumenthal also told MSNBC that Gorsuch told him he should feel free to make their discussion public.
AS PREDICTED
|Before DONALD TRUMP blasted out his tweet, Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick, Mark Joseph Stern and staff put together a list of tweets they predicted he might send in response to JUDGE GORSUCH’S comments. “In the end,” they note, “the president went with the You Lied About Vietnam and FAKE NEWS combo platter.”
ED BOARD OVERTURE
|The Editorial Board of The New York Times notes that the “most reassuring sound in these rancorous early days of the Trump administration” was the legal debate that took place at the 9th Circuit on Tuesday. Measured and thoughtful, the judges and lawyers debated complex legal questions with due respect to the responsibility they share in answering questions for the rest of the country. “Contrast that with the unfiltered outbursts” of the Trump administration. NYT: “The president continues to demean his office in 140-character increments, firing off nasty and reflexive broadsides at anyone who doesn’t agree completely with him. Meanwhile, on Tuesday afternoon, the tedious, necessary work of a branch of government Mr. Trump sometimes seem to wish did not exist reminded the country what government based on the rule of law looks like.”
YOU ARE NOT ALONE
|Tone and delivery aside, it turns out MR. TRUMP isn’t the only president who has weighed in on pending court cases. Amy Fiscus with the Los Angeles Times compares Trump’s recent outburst with five times recent presidents have also commented on pending cases.
HISTORY ON HIS SIDE
|If PRESIDENT TRUMP decides to defy a court order regarding his travel ban, he wouldn’t be the only president to defy the judiciary. Jeff Shesol for The New Yorker places Trump’s immigration ban and his expressed frustration with the courts in historical context.
ICYMI
|Adam Liptak with The New York Times reviewed Tuesday’s hearing at the 9th Circuit regarding the travel ban, noting it was “a lively but technical hearing on an issue that has gripped much of the country’s attention.”
WHO'S WHO
|Andrew Hamm with SCOTUSblog provides a rollcall of all the organizations and interest groups who are lining up on the right and left of the fight over NEIL GORSUCH’S nomination to the Supreme Court. People for the American Way, the Center for American Progress, NARAL, Planned Parenthood and more are standing strong on the left, countered by the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society and the Judicial Crisis Network on the right.
OTHER NEWS
The 4 Types of Constitutional Crises
FiveThirtyEight1. The Constitution doesn’t say what to do. 2. The Constitution’s meaning is in question. 3. The Constitution tells us what to do, but it’s not politically feasible. 4. Institutions themselves fail.
Friedrichs 2.0: New Lawsuit by 8 Teachers Challenges Mandatory Dues Paid to California Union
The 74“The lawyers who challenged union fees in the high-stakes Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association case have filed a new lawsuit in hopes of achieving a decisive Supreme Court victory — a result denied to them last year when a tie vote left mandatory dues in place.”
UC Berkeley School of Law professors hold panel on President Trump's US Supreme Court nominee
The Daily CalifornianThree UC Berkeley School of Law professors debated in a panel Tuesday about Judge Neil Gorsuch’s qualifications and their opinions on his stances in specific cases.
5 Questions After Hearing The Oral Arguments Over Trump's Travel Ban
NPR“Two lawyers, three judges, thousands of ordinary Americans: On Tuesday night, oral arguments in Washington v. Trump attracted an unusually large audience for audio-only legal proceedings. The case centers on President Trump’s controversial executive order that would temporarily bar all new refugees from entering the U.S., as well as visa holders from seven majority-Muslim countries…Here are a few key questions that were raised, directly or indirectly, during the arguments.”