After a federal district judge in Pennsylvania ruled conclusively and caustically against the Trump campaign in an election dispute, Twitter was consumed by comments about the judge’s political profile.

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump’s lawyer, TV apologist and international man of mystery, tweeted out a statement Saturday evening describing U.S. District Judge Matthew W. Brann as an “Obama-appointed judge.” That’s true. But what were we to make of the fact, tweeted out by legal commentator Walter Olson, that Brann’s biography lists him as a member of the Federalist Society, the conservative/libertarian law group that liberals like to demonize?

The answer is that Brann is both an Obama appointee and, according to Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., a “longtime conservative Republican.” That seeming anomaly results from the fact that Pennsylvania’s two senators — Toomey and Democrat Bob Casey Jr. — collaborate on making recommendations for federal judgeships, a not-uncommon arrangement.

Bipartisan cooperation is arguably easier for nominations to federal trial courts than for those to the U.S. Court of Appeals, the appellate court below the Supreme Court. Traditionally, appointments to district courts are regarded by home-state senators as part of their patronage, even though district judges are formally nominated by the president.

Last weekend’s rush to pigeonhole Brann is partly a consequence, I suspect, of the now routine practice in which reporters and commentators describe a federal judge in a newsworthy case in terms of which president appointed that judge. It’s a problematic reflex.

It’s true that both party affiliation and ideology play a role in the selection of federal judges. Moreover, some important Supreme Court decisions have divided 5-4, with Republican appointees on one side and Democratic appointees on the other — not because the justices are in the parties’ pockets, but because presidents of both parties seek to appoint justices who share their philosophies.

But, as I wrote in 2014: “(E)ven Supreme Court justices don’t robotically do the bidding of the presidents who nominated them. ... And when the judge in question sits on a federal district court, the ‘appointed by President X’ factoid is as likely to mislead readers as to inform them.”

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. was mostly correct when he said in 2018: “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.” Roberts was responding to criticism by President Trump of an “Obama judge” who had ruled against the president’s attempt to restrict asylum applications.

Most judicial decisions aren’t exercises in partisanship. Most of the time, federal judges rule on how they see the law — and in the case of the Trump campaign’s arguments, Brann clearly didn’t like what he saw. But that wasn’t because he was an “Obama judge.”

Michael McGough is the Los Angeles Times’ senior editorial writer, based in Washington, D.C.

(10) comments

bosco

So if it's wrong to describe someone as an "Obama-appointed judge" I suppose the MSM will never use the phrase "Trump-appointed judge" either.

Nahhhh, ain't gonna happen.

[ninja]

sevenstones1000

The difference is Trump is corrupt. Obama was not. Trump goes down in history as a nightmare and the worst president ever, by far.

pdl603

Oh boy, your head isn’t just in the sand, but deeply buried where the sun doesn’t shine. Your comment ranks as one of the most laughable in the history of comments. Trump not corrupt, but obama the most corrupt of all presidents.

bosco

[thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup]pdl603, but the Socialist Democrat sheeple will never acknowledge it. Obama talks about how racist America is - yet how many White people voted for him?

[ninja]

olefool

Obama had confidence and class when appointing judges... Trump, not so much, or none at all. This should be a lesson to everyone of the differences in manner between democrats and republicans when judgeships are concerned. Democrats want honesty and integrity and Republicans seem to want raw power and nothing more. It's a matter of right and wrong.

NewMarketParent

@olefool

Integrity matters and I'm glad our guardrails have held up despite the flailing of adult babies.

sevenstones1000

I am too, NMP. Especially proud of the very few Republicans who saw the light and refused to bow to Trump’s coercion.

pdl603

Since when does integrity’s matter to you? You supported a rapist, racist and criminal for president, (Bidenz).

bnick467

Trump has been involved in thousands of court cases for his activities as a rapist, racist, and criminal, both as President and as a private citizen. So tell us Piddle, how many times has Biden had to defend himself in court for the accusations you make?

pdl603

As joe said “he is articulate and clean”, but still the most corrupt president ever.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. No vulgar, racist, sexist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, not personal attacks or ad hominem criticisms.
TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
Be civil. Don't threaten. Don't lie. Don't bait. Don't degrade others.
No trolling. Stay on topic.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
No deceptive names. Apparently misleading usernames are not allowed.
Say it once. No repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link for abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Already a member?

Login Now
Click Here!

Currently a News-Post subscriber?

Activate your membership at no additional charge.
Click Here!

Need more information?

Learn about the benefits of membership.
Click Here!

Ready to join?

Choose the membership plan that fits your needs.
Click Here!