The Economist sets the noise aside and focuses on President Trump’s impact on the federal judiciary.
AMERICA’S judges are supposed to be above party politics and yet are often appointed by politicians and then asked to rule on disputes that can sway elections. On January 9th federal judges in North Carolina gave the state two weeks to redraw its congressional map. In a caustic ruling written by James Wynn, an appellate judge nominated by Barack Obama, the court found that the state’s current map—which let Republicans win ten of the state’s 13 districts with just 53% of the total overall vote—was “motivated by invidious partisan intent”, and violated the first and 14th Amendments. North Carolina vowed to appeal, which could see the case added to two other gerrymandering suits at the Supreme Court. The head of North Carolina’s Republican Party accused Mr Wynn of “waging a personal, partisan war on North Carolina Republicans.”
If Republicans get their way, Democrat-appointed judges like Mr Wynn will soon comprise a smaller share of the federal judiciary. No president has confirmed more federal appellate judges (12) in his first year than Donald Trump. He has also seen six federal district-court judges confirmed, and one Supreme Court justice, Neil Gorsuch. Another 47 nominees await confirmation; 102 more federal judgeships remain open for Mr Trump to fill. With two of the Supreme Court’s liberal justices, and its one unpredictable member (Anthony Kennedy) aged 79 or older, the president may get to name another justice, cementing the Court’s conservative bent.
