Judicial Musical Chairs: Why Trump Faces a Shortage of Court Vacancies

The second round of the Trump Administration might not be the grand slam expected for reshaping the federal courts—turns out there aren’t many vacancies to fill this time around. With judges holding onto their seats tighter than a cat clinging to a windowsill, President Trump’s chances of influencing the judiciary could be slipping right through his fingers. The reasons? A mix of hesitance from judges to step down, a strategic game of musical chairs, and some aging judges loving their cushy benches a little too much.

Russell Wheeler from the Brookings Institution highlights this intriguing paradox: there are fewer strategic retirements by Republican-appointed judges than usual. Some may worry about being replaced by Trump’s picks, which raises an eyebrow or two when considering what those concerns might be. If only those judges could look into a crystal ball and see what the future holds! Maybe their hesitance is because they’ve watched the first act too closely and don’t want to end up as a storyline in a lackluster sequel.

Another layer? Judges are serving longer than ever, with many youthful appointees opting to stick around instead of passing the baton. So instead of predicting a judicial vacancy bonanza, we’re looking at a scenario reminiscent of a Netflix show you keep coming back to, even if it’s dragging a bit. At this rate, will Trump need to start taking notes from the election playbook on how to coax those judges out of their robes?

What do you think—is it time for some judges to retire, or should they stick around longer? Let’s hear your thoughts!

About the Author

View All Posts