Obama’s Empty Federal Bench

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/safari_vacation/5929769873/sizes/m/in/photostream/" target="_blank">Flickr/s_falkow</a>

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.

There are more empty seats on the federal bench now than when President Barack Obama took office, according to a Congressional Research Service report, skewing federal courts to the right and leaving some jurisdictions with overwhelming caseloads.

From same-sex marriage to health care to immigration, the past few years have shown just how important the federal judiciary can be in shaping how Americans live their lives. Yet the study, first posted by Steven Aftergood of Secrecy News, shows what liberal legal advocacy groups have been saying for a while: The Obama administration is lagging behind its recent predecessors when it comes to judicial confirmations. The report notes that Obama is the only one of the last three presidents to have more district and circuit court vacancies today than when he first entered the White House. 

Here’s a chart from the report:

The chart makes it clear that, as my colleague Nick Baumann reported last year, this isn’t simply a matter of Republican obstruction, although that is an important factor. Even if that ceased tomorrow, the Obama administration has offered so few judicial nominations that most of the vacancies still wouldn’t be filled. Recess appointments aren’t a solution, because without Senate approval lifetime judicial appointments become short term ones.  Should Obama lose the 2012 election, the number of vacancies would set up a President Mitt Romney with the opportunity to pack the federal bench with Republican nominees. 

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate