Judges nominated by President Trump play key role in upholding voting limits ahead of Election Day

Washington Post logo

An analysis by The Washington Post found that nearly three out of four opinions issued in voting-related cases by federal judges nominated by the president favored maintaining restrictions.

Federal judges nominated by President Trump have largely ruled against efforts to loosen voting rules in the 2020 campaign amid the coronavirus pandemic and sided with Republicans seeking to enforce restrictions, underscoring Trump’s impact in reshaping the judiciary.

An analysis by The Washington Post found that nearly three out of four opinions issued in federal voting-related cases by judges picked by the president were in favor of maintaining limits. That is a sharp contrast with judges nominated by President Barack Obama, whose decisions backed such limits 17 percent of the time.

The impact of Trump’s court picks could be seen most starkly at the appellate level, where 21 out of the 25 opinions issued by the president’s nominees were against loosening voting rules. Continue reading.

Appeals court deals blow to Democrats’ pursuit of McGahn testimony

The Hill logo

A federal appeals court in Washington on Monday dismissed a Democratic-led House committee lawsuit for the testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn, finding the lawmakers lack legal grounds to enforce their subpoena in court.

The 2-1 ruling by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals was the latest setback for Democrats in their yearlong court battle over a subpoena issued to McGahn in April of last year.

The full D.C. Circuit ruled just three weeks ago in the case that the House has standing to sue to enforce its subpoena. But the panel ruled Monday that the lawmakers still lack a valid legal claim to make in court since Congress never authorized the House to bring such lawsuits. Continue reading.