3 ms·
> A judge, in a city that is the stronghold of the party that is opposing the current administration [...] How is this relevant?
by ciarannolan 6y ago
> A judge, in a city that is the stronghold of the party that is opposing the current administration [...]
How is this relevant?
- jonathannat 6y agoThat this is a politically motivated judgemenet
- ciarannolan 6y agoBased on what evidence?
- untog 6y agoSo everyone living in California is, absent of any evidence, automatically assumed to be a political enemy of the Trump administration? IMO this is one of the most damaging effects of the electoral college. There are plenty of Republicans in California (particularly once you leave the cities) and a whole lot of people who aren’t really politically anything and might not even vote, but it’s a “blue state” so any nuance is lost.
- Nasrudith 6y agoThat is a downright terrifying take - it implies literally any rejection is invalid if from an opposing political party without so much as a sketchy claim to a conflict of interest and implies absolute power with no checks as the "rightful state".
- dragonwriter 6y agoIt's not. Where a federal court sits has almost no bearing on its membership, especially since the long-standing tradition of Presidential collaboration with home-state senators in appointing federal district court judges started eroding in favor of ideological tests starting about with the Reagan Administration. The media typically reinforces misunderstanding of this by referring to federal courts (both district and appellate) as courts of the city in which they are headquartered, frequently referring to eaxh the US District Court for the Northern District of California and the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit as a “San Francisco court.”