Oh, that would be EPIC!
Oh, that would be EPIC!
At the federal appellate level, the vast majority of cases are first decided by 3-judge panels. Let's say 10 out of the 30 are already relatively conservative, so each case gets a 1/3 conservative presence.They're worried about 4 judges in a group of almost 30?
At the federal appellate level, the vast majority of cases are first decided by 3-judge panels. Let's say 10 out of the 30 are already relatively conservative, so each case gets a 1/3 conservative presence.
Boosting that to 14/30 and every cycle of cases has a greater chance of 2 conservative judges on the panel. Its kinda a numbers game. And "flip" is very click-baity. Unless they are already at 15 or so "conservative" judges (which I don't think they are).
FWIW. But I can see a number of my friends having much this same mind set...
I'm a Lifelong Democrat. Here's Why I Voted for Trump.
FWIW. But I can see a number of my friends having much this same mind set...
I'm a Lifelong Democrat. Here's Why I Voted for Trump.
It is usually better to have as few bosses as possible.That is a well written piece. We have a plant in PA, most of the folks I have talked to there have said the same thing. They had voted a certain way for years because the Union said so...The result was a country they no longer recognize...
I have to admit I'm skeptical. It's like with global warming. This is information I can't independently verify. I am reliant on the experts to tell me. So if the experts want me to believe them. They should probably stop acting like they're lying.