A snapshot of judges confirmed to the federal bench under Joe Biden and Donald Trump

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
99,418
131,728
113
Not linking, it's behind a paywall on the Economist.
Biden has put 85 judges on the bench in 2 years. 75% are women. Trump put 234 judges on the bench in 4 years, and 24% were women. 66% percent of Biden's judges are non-white, 84% of Trump's picks are white. Interesting to note that a third of the Biden judges in his first year in office had experience as public defenders.
So, white and a dude if you were nominated by Trump. Reflective of America if nominated by Biden.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
48,118
40,829
113
40
Not linking, it's behind a paywall on the Economist.
Biden has put 85 judges on the bench in 2 years. 75% are women. Trump put 234 judges on the bench in 4 years, and 24% were women. 66% percent of Biden's judges are non-white, 84% of Trump's picks are white. Interesting to note that a third of the Biden judges in his first year in office had experience as public defenders.
So, white and a dude if you were nominated by Trump. Reflective of America if nominated by Biden.

Not really reflective of America for Biden. A small majority of America is white and the population I'm assuming is about half male and half female . . . excluding all of the 130 other "genders" out there of course.

Not that Trump's numbers are really reflective of America either.

Personally I'm just hoping they are qualified and quite frankly I feel better about the qualifications of Biden's judges simply because Trump was always looking for judges who will do his bidding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaboKP

Aardvark86

HR All-American
Jan 23, 2018
3,140
3,247
113
Not really reflective of America for Biden. A small majority of America is white and the population I'm assuming is about half male and half female . . . excluding all of the 130 other "genders" out there of course.

Not that Trump's numbers are really reflective of America either.

Personally I'm just hoping they are qualified and quite frankly I feel better about the qualifications of Biden's judges simply because Trump was always looking for judges who will do his bidding.
Actually, 'reflective of america' isn't, or shouldn't really be, the test. Reflective of the qualified applicant pool should be the test. If you assume that to be a federal judge, you probably ought to minimally be (i) a lawyer (ii) of a certain quantity and quality of age/experience, and further that particular pool of people doesn't actually "look like the rest of America," I'd venture a guess that Trump's appointees probably look "closer" to the qualified applicant pool than Biden's. But hey, politicians can nominate who they want, and if Biden wants to discriminate based on sex, race, etc. (which I think the stats would suggest to a sufficient degree to get past a motion to dismiss), that's his prerogative as President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TarponSpringsNole

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
48,118
40,829
113
40
Actually, 'reflective of america' isn't, or shouldn't really be, the test. Reflective of the qualified applicant pool should be the test. If you assume that to be a federal judge, you probably ought to minimally be (i) a lawyer (ii) of a certain quantity and quality of age/experience, and further that particular pool of people doesn't actually "look like the rest of America," I'd venture a guess that Trump's appointees probably look "closer" to the qualified applicant pool than Biden's. But hey, politicians can nominate who they want, and if Biden wants to discriminate based on sex, race, etc. (which I think the stats would suggest to a sufficient degree to get past a motion to dismiss), that's his prerogative as President.

Really you think Aileen Cannon is qualified? She keeps getting over ruled on basic law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoleATL

Aardvark86

HR All-American
Jan 23, 2018
3,140
3,247
113
Really you think Aileen Cannon is qualified? She keeps getting over ruled on basic law.
Sigh. Qualified means possessing the minimum qualifications, which in this case I've defined to mean having a law degree and (to put it bluntly) not being fresh out of law school. Trust me, if there is a person in this universe who knows that there is such a thing as bad lawyers and bad judges, it is me. And oh, by the way, that's an equal opportunity problem (consider, for example, Ann Marie Donnelly, Ray Moore). (Also, as a general rule, be careful what you wish for if overruling is your test. Cough cough 9th circuit.)
 
Last edited:

Colonoscopy

HR All-American
Silver Member
Feb 20, 2022
4,381
5,919
113
50
Not linking, it's behind a paywall on the Economist.
Biden has put 85 judges on the bench in 2 years. 75% are women. Trump put 234 judges on the bench in 4 years, and 24% were women. 66% percent of Biden's judges are non-white, 84% of Trump's picks are white. Interesting to note that a third of the Biden judges in his first year in office had experience as public defenders.
So, white and a dude if you were nominated by Trump. Reflective of America if nominated by Biden.
What's the pool of good applicants look like?

I guess I'd want them to look that way.

The problem with affirmative action that most people miss is that a little isn't the same as a lot.

As far as gender, I would expect a skew of female to democrat, male to republican. I do believe female law grads are now about 50% -- although it's less clear what the breakdown looks like when it comes to people ready to be judges. (either way)
 

mnole03

HR Legend
Mar 20, 2005
24,121
61,972
113
Actually, 'reflective of america' isn't, or shouldn't really be, the test. Reflective of the qualified applicant pool should be the test. If you assume that to be a federal judge, you probably ought to minimally be (i) a lawyer (ii) of a certain quantity and quality of age/experience, and further that particular pool of people doesn't actually "look like the rest of America," I'd venture a guess that Trump's appointees probably look "closer" to the qualified applicant pool than Biden's. But hey, politicians can nominate who they want, and if Biden wants to discriminate based on sex, race, etc. (which I think the stats would suggest to a sufficient degree to get past a motion to dismiss), that's his prerogative as President.
Anywhere judges are asked to act as finder of fact, representation should matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chishawk1425

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
99,418
131,728
113
Actually, 'reflective of america' isn't, or shouldn't really be, the test. Reflective of the qualified applicant pool should be the test. If you assume that to be a federal judge, you probably ought to minimally be (i) a lawyer (ii) of a certain quantity and quality of age/experience, and further that particular pool of people doesn't actually "look like the rest of America," I'd venture a guess that Trump's appointees probably look "closer" to the qualified applicant pool than Biden's. But hey, politicians can nominate who they want, and if Biden wants to discriminate based on sex, race, etc. (which I think the stats would suggest to a sufficient degree to get past a motion to dismiss), that's his prerogative as President.
I'll be charitable and assume by putting the word closer in quotation marks signals you understand Trump didn't make picks solely on the professional and academic qualifications of the nominees. If not, then you are making a giant leap that Trump picked superior nominees.
It's interesting that you suggest Biden is discriminating, but don't acknowledge that behavior exhibited by Donald Trump. Do you think he looked carefully at each nominees qualifications? It's been widely reported that nominees were chosen by Don McGahn first, then Pat Cippolne, and Trump's involvement was looking at pictures of them. If 84 percent of Trump's picks were white, do you think it's possible that he bypassed a whole lot of faces because he figured they were too dumb and lazy to be a good judge? If 76 percent of the picks were men, do you think it's possible that Trump looked at the face of some nominees and saw someone who just couldn't be a good judge because she'd be all moody at times, and not capable of thinking clearly? I assume the choosers of the judges knew Trump's inherent biases and chose accordingly. Maybe Don McGahn was just as biased?
It's very interesting that Biden has made it a point to put public defenders on the bench. Do you see value in that, or is the judiciary the sole territory of guys who slogged their way through the legal office of a large insurance company, or think tank theorists who wrote great papers about originalism that made other Federalists all weepy eyed? Women and minorities have been unfairly underrepresented in the judiciary since the founding of our nation. I find it laudable that Biden is trying to change that. I see value in people with a broader experience in life making decisions that affect us all. If you have supportive data that shows Biden is putting lesser qualified people on the bench have at it.
I do take some satisfaction in seeing that quite a few of Biden's nominees are getting a handful of votes from Republican senators.
 

MitchLL

HR Legend
Dec 26, 2018
22,996
36,906
113
No one should be surprised of anything Turd did as President.

He was the definition of "unqualified".

In pretty much anything.