Republicans and Democrats hammer Trump's judicial nominee
Steven Menashi faced criticism for refusing to answer questions and his controversial writings.
Republicans and Democrats on Wednesday castigated President Donald Trump’s nominee to the powerful Second Circuit Court of Appeals for dodging their questions as well as his prior controversial writings.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in particular chided Steven Menashi for not being more forthcoming during his confirmation hearing after the nominee wouldn’t provide specifics on how or if he helped shape Trump’s immigration policy. Menashi is currently associate counsel to the president.
In the weeks leading up to his confirmation hearing, liberal judicial groups railed against Menashi for his earlier writings, highlighting his comments on “ethnonationalism.”
Graham criticized Menashi for his editorial in the New York Sun on trial lawyers that the senator said suggested that such lawyers took advantage of the public. ...
Some of the most heated moments in the hearing took place when senators grilled Menashi about his work for the White House. Menashi, for the most part, refused to provide many details.
“I’m just asking if you have worked or advised on the administration’s policy of separating families at the border,” asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the committee’s ranking member. “I’m not asking what, just whether you’ve done it.”
Graham even came to Feinstein’s defense after Menashi responded briefly to similar questions from Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri.
“Mr. Menashi we’re not going to do this, you’re not going to answer his questions and not answer hers,” Graham said.
2 posts • Page 1 of 1
Meadows, Cotton introduce bill to prevent district judges from blocking federal policy changes
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) on Wednesday introduced legislation that would prevent district judges from placing nationwide injunctions on federal policy changes.
The two Republicans, both close allies of President Trump, noted the bill follows a decision from a federal judge in California Monday that reinstated a ban on implementing a new policy that would curtail migrants’ ability to apply for asylum at the southern border. An appeals court on Wednesday narrowed that injunction to just Arizona and California, the two border states within its jurisdiction, allowing the administration to apply the rule in New Mexico and Texas.
“Our laws need to be vigorously vetted through the courts, but it makes zero sense for the legality of a nationwide law to rest entirely on the opinion of one judge, or one district court,” said Meadows. “Current law inadvertently empowers detrimental judicial activism, and it needs to change. This is a common-sense reform that returns our system of checks and balances where it was intended to be.” ...
Issues surrounding federal courts have long animated Republicans, and Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have undertaken a campaign to confirm a record number of federal judges to remake the judicial branch in a conservative image.