in ,

Biden’s Ephemeral Victory: Feeble Attempts To Cram Judicial Nominations

In a peculiar, post-election social media update, Donald Trump conveyed his consternation over Democrats potentially affirming judicial nominees during the ensuing lame-duck session. For the incoming president, such an act was egregious and far from tolerable. The underlying implication was that it was perfectly alright for Trump to cram through numerous court nominations when his position was secure, but such opportunities for the Democrats were somehow forbidden.

As of last Friday, the Democratic-majority Senate had confirmed a total of 235 federal judges appointed by President Joe Biden. Interestingly, this toll outpaces that of previous President Donald Trump by just one. Ostensibly, it seems as a flimsy victory for Biden against his predecessor, enough solely to instigate mockery and laughter among those far removed from the echo chamber of Democratic politics.

Check out our Trump 2025 Calendars!

This latest confirmation seems to be Biden’s final judicial appointment, placing his legacy as securing one Supreme Court justice, 45 appeals court judges, 187 district court judges, and two judges on the U.S. Court of International Trade. Presumably, in the bike-riding, ice cream-licking world of the septuagenarian, these figures stand monumental, epitomizing his transient tenure.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer crowed last Friday night applauding the record-breaking feat of confirming more judges under Biden’s presidency than any other in recent decades. To a clear-thinking observer, however, this stands as an overt mandate snatched in the briefest moment of majority power rather than a mark of diplomatic effort or legislative competence.

This record for the most judicial appointments in a single four-year term was previously held by Jimmy Carter who confirmed 262 judges to the federal bench prior to his defeat in 1980. Trump nearly achieved this high mark—with 234 confirmations—but was surpassed by the current President’s narrowly controlled, four-year Senate majority that managed to confirm 235 judges. A superficial victory in numbers that seems suspiciously reliant on a tenuous hold on power rather than any objective worthy of admiration.

Democratic leaders self-congratulated on these appointments, boasting on how their nominees have supposedly transformed the federal judiciary. Among the 235 confirmations, for instance, 150 were women and 139 were people of color. They tout these figures, purporting an illusion of progressive achievement, yet one might wonder about the true merit, qualification and potential impartiality of these appointees.

Joe Biden also seems to take pride in the supposed ‘diversity’ of his judicial picks. More Black judges, Hispanic judges, women-of-color, and more openly LGBTQ+ people have allegedly been confirmed during his tenure than any previous administration. However, given mainstream appeal for diversity seems to be on the decline, these appointments seem more like pandering to a loud minority rather than serving the broader interest of the people.

Other firsts in the Biden administration included the first Black woman confirmed to the Supreme Court, the first Muslim Americans on the federal bench, the first open lesbian to serve on any federal circuit court, the first Navajo federal judge, and the first Native Hawaiian woman federal judge. To some, this could seem less like striving for best-fit appointments but more like an unabashed game of ‘diversity’ bingo, where identity ticks boxes rather than their experience or skills.

This scramble for judicial affirmations wasn’t a spontaneous act for the Democrats. They undertook a sustained, four-year endeavor to secure these confirmations, sacrificing pragmatism for ideologically driven decisions. An observer might describe this campaign as a success, especially an observer rooted deep within the echo chambers of contemporary left-leaning politics.

A skeptic could naturally question: ‘Democratic jubilations over these judicial confirmations notwithstanding, wouldn’t Trump and the Republican-majority Senate soon negate this narrow lead with their own appointments of about 230 judges or so?’ Surprisingly, however, the answer seems to be a confident no.

As reported by The Washington Post last month, even some Republicans admit that Trump presumably won’t be able to match Biden’s tally of judge confirmations in his next term. Yet, this minor setback wouldn’t deter a Republican comeback geared towards restoring the balance of power in the judiciary.

This detail urges us to consider Biden, Schumer and their allies’ ostentatious boasting of victory—on what they bizarrely term as one of their party’s top priorities—as nothing more than a temporary blip in the continuous saga of judicial confirmations. The seemingly ecstatic Democrats might hesitate to acknowledge this outcome as their fleeting moment in the spotlight, soon to be overshadowed by more logical strategies towards fair and balanced appointments.

It seems that when faced with the inevitability of losing the Senate majority in the upcoming tenure, the Democrats scrambled to hastily confirm as many judges as they possibly could in their favor. However, their mutual back-patting serves little purpose against an impending shift towards Republican dominance.

Clearly, the Democrats are overzealous in their mission to skew the judiciary towards their sociopolitical ideologies. Their narrow, limited success might give them a temporary buzz, but the everlasting balance of power dances to an unending tune that doesn’t favor hasty stratagems or self-serving political moves.