Trump's latest judicial pick is someone that Joe Biden almost nominated

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Wednesday he plans to tap Chad Meredith, a former state solicitor general in Kentucky, for a federal judgeship in the state — a move that could face objections from Sen. Rand Paul, who opposed the nomination three years ago.
Meredith was the starring player in a bit of judicial nominations drama in the previous administration, when then-President Joe Biden had agreed to nominate Meredith, who was enthusiastically supported by Sen. Mitch McConnell, the former Senate majority leader. It was a curious move at the time, because Meredith had a track record of defending Kentucky's anti-abortion laws and the nomination would come in the immediate aftermath of the 2022 Supreme Court decision that eliminated a constitutional right to the procedure.
But Paul indicated to the Biden White House at the time that he would block Meredith's confirmation proceedings from moving forward, so the former president never formally nominated him. Biden's decision to back off Meredith was also a relief to Democrats and abortion rights groups who had been enraged at the prospect of Biden tapping an anti-abortion lawyer for a lifetime judiciary seat.
In a social media post announcing the nomination, Trump called Meredith 'highly experienced and well qualified.'
'Chad is a courageous Patriot who knows what is required to uphold the Rule of Law, and protect our Constitution,' Trump wrote on Truth Social Wednesday night.
McConnell said in a statement Wednesday that Trump made an 'outstanding choice' in choosing Meredith, who also served as chief deputy general counsel for former Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin.
'His demonstrated devotion to the rule of law and the Constitution will serve the people of Kentucky well on the federal bench,' McConnell said. 'I look forward to the Senate confirming his nomination.'
Paul's office did not immediately return a request for comment Wednesday night on the nomination. Three years ago, Paul accused McConnell of cutting a 'secret deal' with the White House as a reason why Meredith's nomination never moved forward under Biden.
'Unfortunately, instead of communicating and lining up support for him, Senator McConnell chose to cut a secret deal with the White House that fell apart,' Paul said at the time.
Paul never made any substantive objections about Meredith himself. It's unclear whether Paul would hold similar process concerns with Meredith's formal nomination under Trump.
But Paul had effective veto power over a judicial pick in his home state because the Senate continues to honor the so-called blue slip rule, a decades-old custom that says a judicial nominee won't move forward if there is opposition from his or her home-state senator. The Biden White House also deferred to that custom, which is why Biden never ended up nominating Meredith.
Though the rule has been eroded in part, namely for appellate court judges whose seat spans several states, the custom has remained intact for district court nominees who are more closely tied to their home states. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has so far made no indication that he would deviate from that longstanding custom.
Lena Zwarensteyn, senior director of the fair courts program and an adviser at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, criticized Trump's selection of Meredith given his 'disturbing anti-abortion record."
'The nomination of Chad Meredith to a lifetime judgeship should trouble everyone,' Zwarensteyn said.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

an hour ago

• USA Today

Some Democrats are finally standing up to Trump – even if it gets them arrested

Not all Democrats are afraid to push back against Donald Trump's immigration policy. Some are willing to be detained. In safely blue areas of the country, constituents are asking themselves who has the audacity to stand up to President Donald Trump's extreme immigration agenda. Earlier this week, New York City constituents got their answer. On June 17, New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents while escorting a man out of immigration court in Manhattan. Lander, who repeatedly asked to see a judicial warrant for the man ICE was attempting to detain, was held in custody for four hours. The federal government is still trying to decide whether it will charge him with a crime. 'We're not just showing up for just a few families, or for the strength of our democracy,' Lander told the supporters waiting for him outside the federal courthouse. 'We are showing up for the future of New York City.' While it's unclear that Lander's arrest will make any difference in his chances to be New York City's next mayor, one thing is now certain: He is the kind of person the city and Democrats need in the Trump era. Democrats should be fighting Trump's systematic hate Lander is now a member of an exclusive group of Democratic politicians who have gotten into legal trouble for combating the Trump administration's extreme deportation agenda. These politicians are not doing anything wrong – they are simply trying to stand up for the immigrants who make this country great. Opinion: Trump lied about the LA protests so you wouldn't see what he's really doing The first to face legal repercussions was Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, who was arrested in April and later indicted for allegedly assisting an undocumented immigrant in escaping arrest. Then in May, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested at an ICE detention center when three members of New Jersey's congressional delegation arrived for an unannounced inspection. Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who was also arrested that day, was indicted on June 10 for allegedly interfering with immigration officers. Less than a week before Lander's arrest, Sen. Alex Padilla, D-California, was handcuffed and thrown out of a Department of Homeland Security news conference. This defiance is encouraging to see. People who have the privilege of a public platform are putting their careers on the line to stand up for those who are being terrorized by the federal government. These actions, so long as they are peaceful, are how Democrats should be reacting to the Trump administration. We need a mayoral candidate who suits New York Until this moment, Lander had flown under the radar for the duration of the city's mayoral race. Despite his position as the city's top financial officer and an endorsement from a panel of experts with The New York Times, Lander has been polling behind front-runner Andrew Cuomo, a former New York governor, and Zohran Mamdani, a member of the New York State Assembly. Who is Zohran Mamdani? A Democratic socialist is running for NYC mayor. I hope he can rally voters. | Opinion It's not that Lander is a bad candidate – he's experienced and policy-driven, and he has a progressive view of what the city can be. He and Mamdani have cross-endorsed each other in the hopes of besting Cuomo in the ranked-choice voting system. Lander just doesn't have Cuomo's name recognition or Mamdani's charisma. By getting arrested, Lander has shown New Yorkers that someone is willing to stand up for their values of protecting immigrants. We don't have to elect Cuomo, who had to resign in disgrace in 2021 after more than a dozen women accused him of sexual harassment. Nor do we have to elect incumbent Eric Adams, who has welcomed ICE into our city against the wishes of the voters. Lander is showing us that we could have someone who is willing to fight the Trump administration while leading the nation's most populous city. And he's one of several showing Democrats the way forward. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno

Hamilton Spectator

an hour ago

• Hamilton Spectator

The Latest: 2nd week of Israel-Iran war starts with renewed strikes

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The second week of the Israel-Iran war started with a renewed round of strikes despite talks between European ministers and Iran's top diplomat. Friday's talks, which aimed at de-escalating the fighting between the two adversaries, lasted for four hours in Geneva, but failed to produce a breakthrough. Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump continued to weigh his country's military involvement and concerns spiked over potential strikes on nuclear reactors. Still, European officials expressed hope for future negotiations. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he was open to further dialogue but stressed Tehran wasn't interested in negotiating with the U.S. while Israel continued attacking. Here is the latest: Tehran vows to make Grossi 'pay' A senior adviser for Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, vowed in a social media post Saturday to make the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency 'pay' once the war with Israel is over. Ali Larijani's threat comes as IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi has become a major target for many Iranian officials who say his conflicting statements about the status of Iran's nuclear program incited the Israeli surprise attack last week. Grossi told the United Nations' Security Council Friday that while Iran has the material to build a nuclear bomb, it appears they have no plans to do so. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

an hour ago

Supreme Court rejects toy company's push for a quick decision on Trump's tariffs

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a push from an Illinois toy company asking for a quick decision on the legality of President Donald Trump's tariffs. Learning Resources Inc. wanted the justices to take up the case soon, rather than let it continue to play out in lower courts. The company argues the tariffs and uncertainty are having a 'massive impact' on businesses around the country and the issue needs swift attention from the nation's highest court. The justices didn't explain their reasoning in the brief order rebuffing the motion to fast-track the issue, but the Supreme Court is typically reluctant to take up cases before lower courts have decided. An appeals court is set to hear the case in late July. The company argues that the Republican president illegally imposed tariffs under an emergency powers law, bypassing Congress. It won an early victory in a lower court, but the order is on hold as an appeals court considers a similar ruling putting a broader block on Trump's tariffs. The appeals court has allowed Trump to continue collecting tariffs under the emergency powers law for now. The Trump administration has defended the tariffs by arguing that the emergency powers law gives the president the authority to regulate imports during national emergencies and that the country's longtime trade deficit qualifies as a national emergency.