Congress

Republicans cry foul with some judges ‘unretiring’ before second Trump term

Published

1 year ago

December 16, 2024

With little more than a month to go before Donald Trump’s second term in the White House, a set of federal judges who previously announced retirements are pulling back those decisions. And Republicans are none too pleased.

Most prominent among the federal jurists to reverse a retirement announcement is Judge James Wynn of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. His name vanished from a list of pending vacancies over the weekend, joining two district court judges in North Carolina — Algenon Marbley and Max Cogburn — in pulling back their decisions once it became clear President Joe Biden would not be able to appoint their successors.

In a letter to Biden, Wynn wrote “that, after careful consideration, I have decided to continue in regular active service” on the bench. All three were appointed by Democratic presidents.

Their decisions serve to deny Trump further bench vacancies to fill as he hopes to capitalize on his push to move the federal judiciary rightward. Though judges routinely time retirements to allow a desired president to appoint their successors, the GOP backlash has been consistent and heated.

“Judge Wynn’s brazenly partisan decision to rescind his retirement is an unprecedented move that demonstrates some judges are nothing more than politicians in robes,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), whose state is part of the circuit, in a statement over the weekend. “The Senate Judiciary Committee should hold a hearing on his blatant attempt to turn the judicial retirement system into a partisan game, and he deserves the ethics complaints and recusal demands from the Department of Justice heading his way.”

Tillis isn’t alone in his criticisms, as Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has previously warned judges of consequences should they rescind previously announced retirements.

“Never before has a circuit judge unretired after a presidential election,” McConnell said on the Senate floor on Dec. 2. “It’s literally unprecedented. And to create such a precedent would fly in the face of a rare bipartisan compromise on the disposition of these vacancies.”

McConnell has urged any judge pulling back on their retirement announcements to recuse themselves from matters coming before them. He urged the incoming Trump administration to “explore all available recusal options with these judges,” since in his view they “have a political finger on the scale.”

“It’s hard to conclude this is anything other than open partisanship,” the outgoing Republican leader said on the floor.

For Democrats’ part, they pointed to previous instances of Republicans making choices around the federal bench post-elections, including McConnell’s decision to not consider a Supreme Court vacancy during the 2016 election cycle while President Barack Obama was in office.

“When I hear the senator [McConnell] come to the floor … and talk about whether there is any gamesmanship going on, I don’t know. But I can tell you we saw it at the highest possible level in filling the vacancy on the Supreme Court when Antonin Scalia passed away,” said Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) on the floor following McConnell’s remarks.

The backdrop for the reconsideration of retirement announcements is a deal struck between Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Republicans to grant Trump four circuit court nominations to fill — Democrats said President Joe Biden’s replacement picks for those slots lacked the votes for confirmation — in exchange for quicker consideration of a dozen or so district court vacancies.

But Wynn’s decision — he was one of those four circuit court positions — complicates that math. Durbin defended the deal as having “reflected some realities that haven’t been publicized much.”

“Two of them did not have the total support of the Democratic caucus — it was an uphill struggle,” Durbin said. “Two more of them decided to stay on and not leave,” he added, reflecting the future decision of Wynn to retain active status on the bench.

Another one of those involved in the appeals court deal, Adeel Mangi, decried the “broken” confirmation process in a letter to Biden obtained by BLaw on Monday. He would have been the first Muslim appeals court judge in the country, if confirmed, but couldn’t command sufficient support from Democrats.

“This is no longer a system for evaluating fitness for judicial office,” Mangi wrote in the letter. “It is now a channel for the raising of money based on performative McCarthyism before video cameras, and for the dissemination of dark-money-funded attacks that especially target minorities.”

He added: “For my part, I entered this nomination process as a proud American and a proud Muslim. I exit it the same way, unbowed.”

On the whole, reconsidering a judicial retirement decision is not an entirely new phenomenon.

Take, for example, the case of Judge Karen Caldwell of Kentucky. The longtime George W. Bush appointee was ready to step aside in 2022, but on the condition that Biden appoint a suitable conservative replacement in her place. But that rumored deal between Biden and McConnell eventually fell through, and Caldwell rescinded her initial decision to retire.

There are other recent examples. A conservative Wisconsin federal judge, Rudolph Randa, pulled back on his announced retirement in 2008 following the victory of President Barack Obama. And an appeals court judge from Indiana, Michael Kanne, abandoned his retirement in 2018 after then-Vice President Mike Pence spiked his intended successor from being tapped.

Congress

House Oversight requests Alan Dershowitz testify in Epstein probe

Published

20 hours ago

June 12, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Oversight Committee requested that Alan Dershowitz, the lawyer who once represented Jeffery Epstein, testify as part of its investigation into the federal government’s handling of the Epstein files.

The interview is tentatively slated for 10 a.m. on July 9, with a video and transcript of the testimony being released “as expeditiously as practical,” Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) wrote in a letter to Dershowitz on Friday.

“Due to public reporting, documents released by the Department of Justice, documents obtained by the Committee, and your former role as Mr. Epstein’s attorney, the Committee believes you have information that will assist in its investigation,” Comer wrote.

Comer told reporters on Wednesday that he wanted to hear from Dershowitz, who helped Epstein secure a controversial plea deal in his 2008 sex abuse case.

“I’m looking forward to testifying,” Dershowitz wrote in a text message to Blue Light News on Friday, adding that he is “trying to adjust my schedule” for July 9.

Congress

Cornyn tells Mike Lee to lay off John Thune

Published

22 hours ago

June 12, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. John Cornyn isn’t a card-carrying member of the Senate GOP’s growing YOLO caucus. But with less than seven months left in office after losing his primary, the Texas Republican appears to be feeling newly free to speak his mind.

The latest clap-back came Thursday night and the early hours of Friday morning, when Cornyn called a conservative influencer a “grifter” and told Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) on social media to stop publicly blaming fellow Republicans — including Senate Majority Leader John Thune — for the fact that the GOP elections bill doesn’t have support to pass inside the party.

“You don’t have the votes” for the SAVE America Act, Cornyn posted on X. “@LeaderJohnThune can’t change that. It is math.”

He was directing his comments at Lee, who had just penned a post telling Thune, “let’s do this!”

Cornyn continued, “Try focusing on Democrats instead of Republicans. Republican on Republican attacks are hurting our chances to win the majority in November.”

Lee responded to ask, “on what planet is this an attack on Republicans?” and appeared to suggest a staffer was tweeting on Cornyn’s behalf: “Once my friend John Cornyn realizes that you’re saying this in his name—whoever you are—I don’t think he’ll be happy with you.”

Cornyn, however, is known for posting himself on his social media accounts in a chamber where many Senate accounts are run solely by staff. And he’s been making it clear all week that he will push back on Trump and his party when he thinks it’s needed.

In multiple conversations with reporters in the Capitol, Cornyn said that Republicans need to “stop the circular firing squad.” And he added that he won’t intentionally be “a thorn in [Trump’s] side,” but he’s also “not going to go out of my way to try to appease him.”

“I want him to succeed, I want the Republican Party to succeed, I want the country to succeed,” Cornyn said this week. “But on a case-by-case basis, when I think there’s been overreach or just a bad idea, I’m not going to hesitate to weigh in.”

The four-term senator’s comments come after he lost his primary last month to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who Trump endorsed in the final days of the runoff.

Cornyn said in an interview with The New York Times that he was not a “wounded bear” but that he believed Trump’s insistence on “slavish adherence” was going to backfire for Republicans in the midterms and result in “the most miserable two years of his life” if Democrats flip the House or Senate.

“I think it is going to be a pretty bumpy ride for the next seven months,” Cornyn said.

Congress

Capitol agenda: What Schumer told us about AI

Published

1 day ago

June 12, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Chuck Schumer wants Congress to pass AI legislation. But he’s casting doubt on it happening this year.

“In this Congress, it’s hard,” the Senate minority leader said in an interview Thursday.

Schumer’s reality check isn’t a complete door-slam. But it underscores the steep climb lawmakers face to bridge a slew of intra-party and inter-chamber divides about what Washington’s approach should be toward the emerging opportunities and risks from the rapidly developing technology.

The problems are multi-pronged.

The White House, whose posture toward AI has shifted dramatically in recent weeks, is angling to enact legislation that would preempt state laws in favor of a national standard. Most recently, administration officials have been exploring a plan to attach preemption legislation to bills designed to shore up kids’ safety online. But there are issues — House Republicans aren’t in love with the Senate GOP’s kid safety bills and Senate Majority Leader John Thune has warned that many senators have concerns “about not trampling states’ rights in the process.”

Democrats aren’t unified on what to do next, with the public broadly skeptical about AI.

Some House and Senate Democrats are leery of state preemption and want to wait until next year to tackle AI, when they might be in power. Opposition from key Democrats is a major factor derailing an attempt by Reps. Lori Trahan and Jay Obernolte to strike a deal on legislation that would set nationwide safety and transparency rules while restricting state action. And Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium on AI data centers pending stricter government oversight.

Schumer is striking a balanced tone on how to proceed, arguing that there are “tremendous benefits” from AI but that “we also have to have guardrails.”

“We should get something done on AI, and it’s … got to be balanced — keep innovation strong, but have guardrails to prevent the dangers,” he said. “That’s a hard needle to thread, but I would very much like to see that get done the sooner the better.”

What else we’re watching:

— FISA LAPSE, CLAYTON NOMINATION: Thune is vowing to move “fairly quickly” to confirm Jay Clayton as director of national intelligence, with the FISA Section 702 spy authority set to lapse at midnight thanks to a stalemate between Democrats and the White House over the position.

— GOP ADVANCES BIG DEFENSE BOOST — Republicans have taken the first steps toward granting President Donald Trump’s request for the largest budget ever for the Pentagon. Senate Armed Services members on Thursday approved a draft of their annual defense authorization bill outlining priorities for $1.14 trillion in defense spending next year. The House Appropriations defense subcommittee advanced $1.1 trillion in fiscal 2027 funding for the Defense Department in a closed-door markup.

Calen Razor and Connor O’Brien contributed reporting.