Biden-McConnell Deal: Judge Karen Caldwell of the Eastern District of Kentucky announces retirement

[In It to Win It]

John P. Collins
@prof_jpc

We have our answer: Judge Karen Caldwell of the Eastern District of Kentucky informed the White House last week that she would retire when a successor was appointed.

Link to tweet

[LonePirate]

1. Why does McConnell want that specific anti-woman judge to be the nominee?

Everything about this deal - which Biden should not take or honor - seems suspicious to me.

[jimfields33]

2. Obviously the president knows what he's doing.

He got 69 judges on the court in less then two years. That’s really good.

[LonePirate]

3. So you support nominating a judge who believes women are second class citizens?

[jimfields33]

4. No but I trust the president

[David__77]

7. I think it is reasonable not to do so.

…

[Marius25]

14. This is a terrible deal.

[PTWB]

17. There is no circumstance where we should nominate an anti-woman, anti-choice judge.

[In It to Win It]

28. The word among the court watchers

is that Judge Caldwell agreed to step down if a conservative replaced her... so if this is true, I'm not sure if a better option was on the table.

[The Magistrate]

19. I Trust Mr. Biden, Sir

I don't trust McConnell, and if Mr. Biden does, he is mistaken, and ought to know better.

McConnell will no more honor a deal than he will a democratic principle.

[Nevilledog]

20. The deal specifics need to be cleared up

Link to tweet

Tweet text:
Chris "Subscribe to Law Dork!" Geidner
@chrisgeidner
·
Jul 1, 2022
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Update: @mjs_DC confirms the @courierjournal's reporting, adding that — and if this is so, it's *absolutely* inexcusable — the "deal" reached is that Mitch gets an anti-abortion lifetime-tenure judge and Biden gets ... two prosecutors while he's in office.

slate.com
The Biden-McConnell Deal to Make an Anti-Abortion Advocate a Federal Judge Is Still On
New details of the controversial Kentucky compromise that has enraged Democrats.

Chris "Subscribe to Law Dork!" Geidner
@chrisgeidner
·
Follow
The White House needs to get on the record about this ASAP. Trump simply declined to even nominate people for some US Attorney positions (see SDNY), instead installing folks in roundabout ways allowed under law for that role. Giving up a judgeship for US Attorneys is unreal.
11:16 AM · Jul 1, 2022

[Baitball Blogger]

13. This is what I'm afraid of: Mitch McConnell gets his part of the deal upfront.

Obviously Biden is thinking, that if we don't get 62 Democrats after the midterms in the Senate, he's going to need Mitch's cooperation to get more appointments to the Supreme Court.

The big flaw in that deal: We have to trust Mitch McConnell

[CrispyQ]

5. Our tent's so big anyone can get in.

McConnell: As long as you pick the judges I want, I'll work with you.

[dalton99a]

6. There are no qualified Democratic candidates in Kentucky

[Hotler]

8. What else can we give you Mitch? Please let us know. nt

[Buckeyeblue]

9. The only way I would make this deal would be if McConnell agreed not to filibuster

a bill to offer federal reproductive rights. Otherwise I'd tell him to piss off.

[PTWB]

10. I'm not going to call anyone out...

But in the last big thread about this, a certain poster was spamming the thread with a message that said “THERE ARE NO VACANCIES IN KENTUCKY.” That person was accusing DUers who were concerned about this report of falling for / spreading misinformation.

Shameful behavior.

Mitch McConnell is a snake. Making a deal with him, if it means nominating / appointing an anti-woman, anti-choice judge, is WRONG.

[In It to Win It]

15. Because that was true according to the info we had. Yesterday, there had been no announced vacancies

Also, I posted this yesterday on a thread about this topic:

There are no vacancies on this particular court UNLESS someone knows of a vacancy about to come in the near future. 😑

It makes no sense for McConnell to make this kind of deal unless he knew about a vacancy opening up.

[SunImp]

30. +1

[aocommunalpunch]

11. This is what a STRONG REPUBLICAN PARTY LOOKS LIKE.

They call the shots and just after Roe fell, too. Ain’t no 3-d chess here. Just a bad deal and the optics magnify that into the stratosphere.

[BlueJac]

12. Pretty much anything McConnell wants I am against!

Why Joe, he will always stab you in the back!

[Nanjeanne]

16. BOHICA

. . .

I've been watching For All Mankind. The use of BOHICA seems appropriate right now . . .

Bend Over - Here It Comes Again!

[H2O Man]

18. Recommended.

This is an important issue. I understand that Biden wants to get along with McConnell so that he can get his next USSC nominee through. But if we changed it from anti-woman to anti-Irish, or -black, Would that still be okay?

[Deminpenn]

21. There are unlikely to be any SCOTUS openings in the next 2 years

Thomas is at the expected life expectency for AfAm men, but appears healthy. The new R justices are young and Alito is 72, Roberts 67.

[H2O Man]

23. Perhaps you might

check the status of Breyer, who retired yesterday.

[Deminpenn]

25. Justice Jackson replaced him

Of course, no one is guaranteed tomorrow and Scalia did die unexpectedly.

I don't see any of Rs deciding to retire while a Dem is president, do you? They worked hard to get this conservative majority.

Anyway, thanks to McConnell, the Senate can no longer fillibuster a SCOTUS nominee.

And all it takes to get these US Attys through is for Schumer to ignore the "blue slip" nonsense just like McConnell did when Rs controlled the Senate. Biden doesn't have to make any trade with McConnell at all.

[Deminpenn]

22. Isn't this supposed to move 2 US Attys through?

I would never trade a lifetime appointment for transitory US Attorneys or any nominee that serves only at the pleasure of the president.

[In It to Win It]

24. Me either

That's a terrible trade.

[mercuryblues]

26. Once again women's rights are being negotiated away

for political coin.

What rights are you willing to give up for a climate change bill? Or gun control laws?

[In It to Win It]

27. It seems the judge agreed to stop down on the condition that a "conservative" replaced her

...or at least, that's the word on the street.

I'm just waiting to hear from SCOTUS Justices about how the judiciary isn't partisan.

[mercuryblues]

29. I would have called her bluff

[PTWB]

31. It's absolutely crazy.