The Left spent four years complaining about the rate that the Trump Administration was filling federal judicial vacancies and attempting to paint nominees as outside of the mainstream. However, a project tracking judicial nominations from The Heritage Foundation illustrates that President Biden has made significantly more appointments than President Trump did at this point in his administration, and the nominees themselves are more controversial. 

Check out the updated Judicial Appointment Tracker, with current and comparative data for 7 features of the appointment process. Pres Biden has appointed 74% more judges than Pres Trump at this point, but they are more than twice as controversial. https://t.co/yLA8GOxJpV

— Thomas Jipping (@TomJipping) August 22, 2022

On Friday, the Biden Administration announced its 24th round of judicial nominees, bringing President Biden's total number of judicial nominees to 132. Each new slate of nominees illustrates the Administration's goal of placing radicals in the judiciary. This time, it's abortion activist Julie Rikelman, nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit:

Conservative opposition is expected in the U.S. Senate, where Democrats are facing pressure from progressive activists to speed up judicial confirmations before the Nov. 8 midterm elections, when they risk losing control of the chamber to Republicans.

In Thursday's hearing, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on multiple Biden nominees for the federal judiciary. Ranking Member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) commented on three nominees in particular, stating, "with their activist records, I don’t believe these nominees will respect the rule of law and follow the law as written, so I’m going to oppose them."

These three nominees were Nancy G. Abudu for the Eleventh Circuit; Nusurat Jahan Choudhury for the Eastern District of New York; and Natasha C. Merle for the Eastern District of New York. 

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee considered five of President Biden's judicial nominations. Most notable was the consideration of nominee Nancy Abudu to the Eleventh Circuit. RNLA is formally opposing the nomination of Ms. Abudu because:

[H]er views are extreme and fall outside of the mainstream. RNLA has only formally opposed one other judicial nominee made by the Biden Administration. We oppose Ms. Abudu because her views and rhetoric go beyond that of even progressive activists, and we see no reason to believe that she will be an impartial judge on the “hot button” issue of election law. 

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold its first meeting to consider judicial nominees since the confirmation of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Included on the agenda is the nomination of Nancy Abudu to the Eleventh Circuit, who RNLA has previously highlighted as a nominee outside of the mainstream.

On Thursday, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed to serve as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court by a vote of 53-47. She will replace Justice Stephen Breyer and be the first Black woman to serve on the Court.

Earlier today, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's nomination to the Supreme Court received a tie vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee. No Republicans voted in favor of the nomination.

News -- In a party-line vote, Senate Judiciary Committee deadlocks 11-11 on the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to SCOTUS.

Next up: A vote tonight to discharge the nomination by full Senate. Simple majority is needed
Cloture vote: Thursday
Confirmation: Thursday or Friday

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) April 4, 2022

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee wrapped up confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court. Join RNLA this Friday at 2:00 p.m. ET for a webinar recapping the week of hearings featuring the Article III Project's Mike Davis and the Ethics and Public Policy Center's Ed Whelan. Register on Zoom here!

On Wednesday, Americans across the country tuned in to day three of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. While many of the same topics previously discussed were raised again, there were some clear takeaways from the 10+ hours of discussion between the Committee and Judge Jackson.

In 17 years of closely watching Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson had the worst second day performance of anyone I have watched when she contradicted herself multiple times during questioning. It also became clear that she is soft on crime, not in some sort of abstract way, but she is overly sympathetic to criminals to the detriment of victims. 

1. Judge Jackson stated: “There were no victims” regarding the sentencing of a fentanyl and heroin drug kingpin. While Judge Jackson did add later that were no victims available to testify, as Senator Cotton pointed out, there are definitely victims of a drug kingpin. However, Judge Jackson still twisted a compassionate release statue to reduce the sentence of this drug kingpin.

Asked if she reached out to any of the victims of a heroin trafficker, Ketanji Brown Jackson dismisses the question by saying “there were no victims” pic.twitter.com/FU0SOCLZRX

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 22, 2022