{"id":9825,"date":"2023-01-23T14:38:58","date_gmt":"2023-01-23T14:38:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=9825"},"modified":"2023-01-23T14:38:58","modified_gmt":"2023-01-23T14:38:58","slug":"the-trumpiest-court-in-america","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=9825","title":{"rendered":"The Trumpiest court in America"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\n\n“Trent Taylor says his cell, in a Texas psychiatric unit operated by the state\u2019s prison system, was covered in human excrement<\/a>. Feces smeared the window and streaked the ceiling. Someone had painted a shit swastika on the wall, alongside a smiley face. According to Taylor\u2019s allegations in a federal lawsuit<\/a>, there was such a thick layer of dried human dung on the floor of the cell that it made a crunching sound as he walked naked across the cell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Taylor alleged that he was kept in this cell for four days, where he neither ate nor drank due to fears that the excrement, which was even packed inside the cell\u2019s water faucet, would contaminate anything he consumed. Then, on the fifth day, he was moved to a bare, frigid cell with no toilet, water fountain, or bed<\/a>. A clogged drain filled the new cell with choking ammonia films. With nowhere to relieve himself, Taylor held his urine for 24 hours before he could do so no longer. And then he had to sleep alone on the floor while covered in his own waste.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court eventually ruled 7\u20131<\/a> that Taylor\u2019s lawsuit against the corrections officers who forced him to live in these conditions could move forward, and that lawsuit settled last February. But the Supreme Court had to intervene after an even more conservative court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, attempted to shut down these claims against the prison guards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A unanimous panel of three Fifth Circuit judges held that it was unclear whether the Constitution prevents prisoners from being forced to remain in \u201cextremely dirty cells for only six days\u201d<\/a> \u2014 although, in what counts as an act of mercy in the Fifth Circuit, the panel did concede that \u201cprisoners couldn\u2019t be housed in cells teeming with human waste for months on end.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This decision, in Taylor v. Stevens<\/em><\/a>, is hardly aberrant behavior by the Fifth Circuit, which oversees federal litigation arising out of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. The Fifth Circuit\u2019s Taylor<\/em> decision stands out for its casual cruelty, but its disregard for law, precedent, logic, and basic human decency is ordinary behavior in this court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dominated by partisans and ideologues \u2014 a dozen of the court\u2019s 17 active judgeships are held by Republican appointees, half of whom are Trump judges \u2014 the Fifth Circuit is where law goes to die. And, because the Fifth Circuit oversees federal litigation arising out of Texas, whose federal trial courts have become a pipeline for far-right legal decisions<\/a>, the Fifth Circuit\u2019s judges frequently create havoc with national consequences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Fifth Circuit has, in recent months, declared an entire federal agency unconstitutional<\/a> and stripped another of its authority to enforce federal laws protecting investors from fraud<\/a>. It permitted Texas Republicans to effectively seize control of content moderation<\/a> at social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. Less than a year ago, the Fifth Circuit forced the Navy to deploy sailors<\/a> who defied an order to take the Covid vaccine, despite the Navy\u2019s warning that a sick service member could sideline an entire vessel or force the military to conduct a dangerous mission to extract a Navy SEAL with Covid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote when the Supreme Court restored the military\u2019s command over its own personnel, the Fifth Circuit\u2019s approach wrongly inserted the courts \u201cinto the Navy\u2019s chain of command<\/a>, overriding military commanders\u2019 professional military judgments.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And this is just a small sample of the decisions the Fifth Circuit has handed down in 2022.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“while the Fifth Circuit is so extreme that its decisions are often<\/a> reversed<\/a> even by the Supreme Court\u2019s current, very conservative majority, its devil-may-care approach to the law can throw much of the government into chaos, and even destabilize our relations with foreign nations<\/a>, before a higher authority steps in. Worse, the Fifth Circuit\u2019s antics could very well be a harbinger for what the entire federal judiciary will become if Republicans get to replace more justices.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“the Supreme Court only hears a tiny percentage of the cases decided by federal appeals courts, and it almost never hears cases brought by extraordinarily vulnerable litigants like Trent Taylor. Indeed, it hears these cases so infrequently that, when the Court decided to intervene on Taylor\u2019s behalf, Justice Samuel Alito wrote a brief opinion<\/a> complaining that Taylor\u2019s case \u201cwhich turns entirely on an interpretation of the record in one particular case, is a quintessential example of the kind that we almost never review.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Fifth Circuit hears a steady diet of ordinary immigration cases, which will often decide whether an individual immigrant can remain with their family in the United States or whether they must be deported to a nation they may barely know, or where they may fear for their physical safety. These cases are now heard by judges like Andrew Oldham, Trump\u2019s sixth appointment to the Fifth Circuit, who spent much of his time both on<\/a> and off the bench<\/a> seeking to make federal immigration policies harsher to immigrants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Similarly, the court hears a steady diet of employment discrimination cases.”  
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“there are reforms that Congress or the Supreme Court could implement<\/a>, which would diminish both the Fifth Circuit\u2019s power and the power of litigants to channel political lawsuits to highly ideological judges. Congress, for example, may strip the Fifth Circuit of its jurisdiction over certain cases, or require certain suits to be filed in a federal court that is not located in the Fifth Circuit. It could also add seats to the court, which would then be filled by President Biden.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A less radical reform<\/a>, proposed by former Fifth Circuit Judge Gregg Costa, would prevent litigants like the Texas AG\u2019s office from handpicking judges who are likely to rule in their favor \u2014 and whose decisions are equally likely to be affirmed by the Fifth Circuit. Costa proposed having all lawsuits seeking a nationwide injunction against a federal law or policy be heard by three-judge panels, rather than a single judge chosen by the plaintiff. These panels\u2019 decisions would then appeal directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing the Fifth Circuit (although a single Fifth Circuit judge might sit on some of these panels).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Realistically, however, systemic reforms to the problem of judge-shopping \u2014 and to the problem of a lawless court of appeals \u2014 are unlikely to happen anytime soon. The House of Representatives will soon be controlled by Republicans, who are unlikely to support legislation that reduces the power of their partisan allies on the bench. And the Supreme Court has six justices appointed by Republican presidents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And so the Fifth Circuit will continue to hand down its decrees, confident that no one with the power to stop them is likely to do so.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.vox.com\/policy-and-politics\/2022\/12\/27\/23496264\/supreme-court-fifth-circuit-trump-court-immigration-housing-sexual-harrassment<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Trent Taylor says his cell, in a Texas psychiatric unit operated by the state\u2019s prison system, was covered in human excrement. Feces smeared the window and streaked the ceiling. Someone had painted a shit swastika on the wall, alongside a smiley face. According to Taylor\u2019s allegations in a federal lawsuit, there was such a thick layer of dried human dung on the floor of the cell that it made a crunching sound as he walked naked across the cell.
\nTaylor alleged that he was kept in this cell for four days, where he neither ate nor drank due to fears that the excrement, which was even packed inside the cell\u2019s water faucet, would contaminate anything he consumed. Then, on the fifth day, he was moved to a bare, frigid cell with no toilet, water fountain, or bed. A clogged drain filled the new cell with choking ammonia films. With nowhere to relieve himself, Taylor held his urine for 24 hours before he could do so no longer. And then he had to sleep alone on the floor while covered in his own waste.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court eventually ruled 7\u20131 that Taylor\u2019s lawsuit against the corrections officers who forced him to live in these conditions could move forward, and that lawsuit settled last February. But the Supreme Court had to intervene after an even more conservative court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, attempted to shut down these claims against the prison guards.<\/p>\n

A unanimous panel of three Fifth Circuit judges held that it was unclear whether the Constitution prevents prisoners from being forced to remain in \u201cextremely dirty cells for only six days\u201d \u2014 although, in what counts as an act of mercy in the Fifth Circuit, the panel did concede that \u201cprisoners couldn\u2019t be housed in cells teeming with human waste for months on end.\u201d<\/p>\n

This decision, in Taylor v. Stevens, is hardly aberrant behavior by the Fifth Circuit, which oversees federal litigation arising out of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. The Fifth Circuit\u2019s Taylor decision stands out for its casual cruelty, but its disregard for law, precedent, logic, and basic human decency is ordinary behavior in this court.<\/p>\n

Dominated by partisans and ideologues \u2014 a dozen of the court\u2019s 17 active judgeships are held by Republican appointees, half of whom are Trump judges \u2014 the Fifth Circuit is where law goes to die. And, because the Fifth Circuit oversees federal litigation arising out of Texas, whose federal trial courts have become a pipeline for far-right legal decisions, the Fifth Circuit\u2019s judges frequently create havoc with national consequences.<\/p>\n

The Fifth Circuit has, in recent months, declared an entire federal agency unconstitutional and stripped another of its authority to enforce federal laws protecting investors from fraud. It permitted Texas Republicans to effectively seize control of content moderation at social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. Less than a year ago, the Fifth Circuit forced the Navy to deploy sailors who defied an order to take the Covid vaccine, despite the Navy\u2019s warning that a sick service member could sideline an entire vessel or force the military to conduct a dangerous mission to extract a Navy SEAL with Covid.<\/p>\n

As Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote when the Supreme Court restored the military\u2019s command over its own personnel, the Fifth Circuit\u2019s approach wrongly inserted the courts \u201cinto the Navy\u2019s chain of command, overriding military commanders\u2019 professional military judgments.\u201d<\/p>\n

And this is just a small sample of the decisions the Fifth Circuit has handed down in 2022.”<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“while the Fifth Circuit is so extreme that its decisions are often reversed even by the Supreme Court\u2019s current, very conservative majority, its devil-may-care approach to the law can throw much of the government into chaos, and even destabilize our relations with foreign nations, before a higher authority steps in. Worse, the Fifth Circuit\u2019s antics could very well be a harbinger for what the entire federal judiciary will become if Republicans get to replace more justices.”<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“the Supreme Court only hears a tiny percentage of the cases decided by federal appeals courts, and it almost never hears cases brought by extraordinarily vulnerable litigants like Trent Taylor. Indeed, it hears these cases so infrequently that, when the Court decided to intervene on Taylor\u2019s behalf, Justice Samuel Alito wrote a brief opinion complaining that Taylor\u2019s case \u201cwhich turns entirely on an interpretation of the record in one particular case, is a quintessential example of the kind that we almost never review.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Fifth Circuit hears a steady diet of ordinary immigration cases, which will often decide whether an individual immigrant can remain with their family in the United States or whether they must be deported to a nation they may barely know, or where they may fear for their physical safety. These cases are now heard by judges like Andrew Oldham, Trump\u2019s sixth appointment to the Fifth Circuit, who spent much of his time both on and off the bench seeking to make federal immigration policies harsher to immigrants.<\/p>\n

Similarly, the court hears a steady diet of employment discrimination cases.” <\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“there are reforms that Congress or the Supreme Court could implement, which would diminish both the Fifth Circuit\u2019s power and the power of litigants to channel political lawsuits to highly ideological judges. Congress, for example, may strip the Fifth Circuit of its jurisdiction over certain cases, or require certain suits to be filed in a federal court that is not located in the Fifth Circuit. It could also add seats to the court, which would then be filled by President Biden.<\/p>\n

A less radical reform, proposed by former Fifth Circuit Judge Gregg Costa, would prevent litigants like the Texas AG\u2019s office from handpicking judges who are likely to rule in their favor \u2014 and whose decisions are equally likely to be affirmed by the Fifth Circuit. Costa proposed having all lawsuits seeking a nationwide injunction against a federal law or policy be heard by three-judge panels, rather than a single judge chosen by the plaintiff. These panels\u2019 decisions would then appeal directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing the Fifth Circuit (although a single Fifth Circuit judge might sit on some of these panels).<\/p>\n

Realistically, however, systemic reforms to the problem of judge-shopping \u2014 and to the problem of a lawless court of appeals \u2014 are unlikely to happen anytime soon. The House of Representatives will soon be controlled by Republicans, who are unlikely to support legislation that reduces the power of their partisan allies on the bench. And the Supreme Court has six justices appointed by Republican presidents.<\/p>\n

And so the Fifth Circuit will continue to hand down its decrees, confident that no one with the power to stop them is likely to do so.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[790,280,221,1489,1213],"class_list":["post-9825","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-share","tag-courts","tag-criminal-justice","tag-donald-trump","tag-judges","tag-judiciary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9825","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9825"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9825\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9826,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9825\/revisions\/9826"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9825"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9825"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9825"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}