Raw Story: California just ‘flipped the script’ on GOP after major ‘bluff’ was called: report

California “bluffed” its way into flipping the script on Republicans and Donald Trump, according to a new report.

Politico on Saturday published a story called, How California bluffed its way into a redistricting war with Trump, in which the outlet quotes “nearly 50 people involved with the effort” who “shared details with POLITICO about the tightly guarded process.”

California is currently in the process of potentially altering its district maps in response to Texas’ redistricting. But it started off as a “bluff,” according to reporters.

“When word got out that Texas might undertake an extraordinary mid-decade redistricting at Donald Trump’s behest, a handful of top California Democratic operatives floated an idea to Rep. Zoe Lofgren: Could California respond in kind?” according to the weekend report. “Lofgren, the chair of California’s 43-member Democratic delegation, consulted in June with a trusted data expert who dismissed it as absurd — a foolhardy end-run around the state’s popular redistricting panel with no guarantee of yielding enough blue seats to fully offset Texas. Deterred by those misgivings, California Democrats instead spent weeks putting up a front, dangling the threat of a countermove without making any real plans to do so.”

The piece quotes Lofgren as saying, “It seemed to me worth a bluff… If the Texans and Trump thought they’d go through all of this and they’d end up not gaining anything, maybe they would stop.”

She then added, “But they didn’t stop… They just doubled down.”

However, the bluff soon met reality.

“So did California Democrats, especially Gov. Gavin Newsom. In a matter of weeks, they bluffed themselves into the marquee political contest of Trump’s second term, a high-voltage fight to shape the outcome of the 2026 midterms and the remaining years of his presidency,” according to the outlet.

Summing up, the reporters wrote, “In the end, 87 of 90 Democrats voted to put the maps on the ballot — a display of consensus that [Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas] said was made possible by the California-under-siege mentality that had been building up ever since Trump re-took the White House.”

“It’s Whac-a-mole. We’ve been trying to play defense,” Rivas reportedly added. “But we finally just threw up our hands and said, ‘We’ve got to flip the script.’”

Read more here.

https://www.rawstory.com/california-flips-the-script-gop

The Grio: Trump calls D.C. neighborhoods ‘slums’ as critics say comments show bias against Black residents

D.C. residents and leaders warn that President Donald Trump’s “crime emergency” in the nation’s capital signals an authoritarian tough-on-crime approach to public safety that will be replicated in other cities.

Residents of Washington, D.C., are continuing to push back against the narratives about their city as military troops and federal officers swarm the streets as part of the Trump administration’s declared 30-day crime emergency.

“It’s offensive, it’s dangerous, and it’s discriminatory to look at the part of the city, that is majority Black and has been so historically, and define them as slums and crime ridden when we’re communities and every neighborhood is different,” said Gregory Jackson, a longtime public safety advocate who lives in Ward 8.

Despite local police data showing a 30-year low crime rate throughout D.C., Trump announced a federal crackdown in the city on Aug. 11, describing the state of crime in the nation’s capital as a “situation of complete and total lawlessness.” He told reporters that day, “We’re getting rid of the slums.”

When asked on Tuesday to clarify whether Trump is referring to homeless encampments or residential buildings as “slums,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president was referring to “the most dangerous communities, neighborhoods and streets in this city where, unfortunately, violence has ravaged these communities and taken the lives of…far too many law-abiding D.C. residents.”

On Friday, President Donald Trump told reporters that D.C. was a “hellhole” before his federal crackdown, declaring “now it’s safe.” The president said of out-of-town visitors: “They’re not going to go home in a body bag. They’re not going home in a coffin.”

Jackson, who served as deputy director of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention under President Joe Biden, said painting a broad brush of the city is “extremely harmful” to Black communities in D.C.

“It’s disrespectful to the families that are there, to the working professionals. On my street, there are young families, there are folks in the military, I served in the White House–we are made up of very diverse family folks and community-centric folks,” he told theGrio.

Courtney Snowden, a sixth-generation Washingtonian and former D.C. deputy mayor, said D.C. neighborhoods are comprised of “amazing” residents who are “committed to the success of the city.”

“[They’re] doing what people do in neighborhoods all across the country. They get up and they go to work every day, they contribute and pay their taxes, and they’re raising families,” Snowden told theGrio. “So to have the president of the United States and his cabinet members talking about American citizens and District residents and the communities in which they live in that way is appalling.”

On Wednesday, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s anti-DEI agenda, said the surge of law enforcement and the National Guard is for the “safety” of the city’s majority Black residents.

Critics who spoke to theGrio said they don’t believe the Trump administration’s stated concerns about crime, and caring about the safety of its residents are “genuine.”

Jamal Holtz, president of the D.C. Young Democrats, noted D.C. “isn’t even among the top 10 most dangerous in the nation.” In fact, three of the top ten cities are in Ohio, which sent additional National Guard troops to D.C. in a show of political support for Trump’s D.C. crackdown.

“This isn’t about a need for public safety. Autocrats have used false pretenses and narratives to take over local matters and take over local law enforcement as a first step towards a broader power grab,” Holtz told theGrio.

“If he’s willing to overturn democracy in D.C. over the false narrative of a crime emergency here in the District of Columbia, I think it should scare all Americans that this will likely happen to communities across the nation,” said Markus Batchelor, political director at People For the American Way and D.C. native.

Critics of the Trump White House say that rather than working with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and local officials to continue the progress already made in making D.C. streets safer, they’ve turned to a tough-on-crime approach to public safety that has proven ineffective without other community intervention programs and investments.

Several mayors of inner cities have touted Biden-era investments and support in community violence intervention strategies as part of the success of reducing crime. However, the Trump administration slashed those funds and programs. The Department of Homeland Security also slashed a $20 million security grant for D.C. earlier this month. Additionally, a bill that would restore a $1 billion deficit in D.C.’s budget, which includes public safety funding, remains stalled in the Republican-controlled Congress.

“Does Washington, D.C., like every other major city in America, have this problem with crime? Absolutely. Are some of those issues exacerbated by, quite frankly, politicians like Trump, who are disinvesting in the inner city, public education, housing, and good-paying jobs? Yes,” said Batchelor.

Jackson, the former White House official, said of Trump’s D.C. crackdown, “A lot of this is a reaction rather than looking at the real strategy that we know can save lives and prevent violence, and really doubling down and supporting a city that does need support.” He said the city “does have work to do,” emphasized it “does not need military forces patrolling communities that don’t even have a grocery store.”

On Friday, Trump announced he will ask Congress for $2 billion to “rebuild” the District of Columbia, including updating roads and light poles. “This place will be beautified within a period of months,” said Trump, who did not indicate whether any of that funding would cover public safety.

Leaders say they’re also concerned about the physical and psychological impact of having troops, federal officers, and military tanks all across city streets.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered that the National Guard to be armed, escalating their presence in D.C.

“It reinforces a stereotype that Black and brown folks are seen as a threat first and a human second,” said Jackson, who recalled being treated like a suspect when he was shot by a stray bullet in 2013.

“Now you could just be walking home from school and be interrogated. Some folks are sitting on their porch and have officers running up on them,” he told theGrio. “It really just reinforces that Black folks in this country, especially in the eyes of the Trump administration, are seen more as a threat and a suspect than Americans or neighbors.”

What do you expect from an unrepentant racist who was sued several times for refusing to rent his New York City apartments to blacks?

https://thegrio.com/2025/08/22/trump-calls-d-c-neighborhoods-slums-as-critics-say-comments-show-bias-against-black-residents

Sacramento Bee: Multiple Republicans Join Democrats on Immigration Bill

Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL) and other Republican lawmakers have backed the Dignity Act, a bipartisan bill aimed at overhauling the immigration system. The legislation aims to provide legal status for undocumented immigrants, bolster border security, and reform visa policies. If passed, the act would lead to significant changes to current immigration laws, reflecting a push for comprehensive reform.

Salazar said, “It takes a lot of courage to step up and say that you might be part of the solution.” She added, “They did break the law. They are illegals or undocumented.”

Salazar stated, “But they have been in the country for more than five years, contributing to the economy. Those people, someone gave them a job, and they are needed because we need hands in order to continue being the number one economy in the world.”

The Dignity Act grants legal status to undocumented immigrants, reforms asylum screening for better legal access, sets up Latin American processing centers to reduce risky migration, creates STEM PhD work visas, and boosts ICE accountability.

The Dignity Act has received backing from several Republican lawmakers. It also gained support from Democrats like Veronica Escobar (D-TX) and Adriano Espaillat (D-NY).

Escobar (D-TX) said, “I have seen firsthand the devastating consequences of our broken immigration system, and as a member of Congress, I take seriously my obligation to propose a solution. Realistic, common-sense compromise is achievable, and is especially important given the urgency of this moment. I consider the Dignity Act of 2025 a critical first step to overhauling this broken system.”

Immigration attorney Rosanna Berardi questioned the bill’s viability, citing conflicts with enforcement policies under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Critics argued it could undermine efforts to curb unauthorized migration.

Immigration attorney Rosanna Berardi said, “Without congressional action to roll back many of the core immigration elements of H.R. 1—especially the funding and restrictions around detention, deportations, and parole—there’s really no practical space for the Dignity Act’s approach. However, I do think this framework could help create bipartisan conversations focused on creating easier work-visa access and temporary status for migrant workers in industries like agriculture, hospitality, health care and manufacturing.”

Salazar emphasized the need for a comprehensive strategy to meet labor demands and maintain economic stability. If enacted, the legislation would likely spark a reevaluation of national immigration policies.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/multiple-republicans-join-democrats-on-immigration-bill/ss-AA1L3St5

Raw Story: ‘Nuts!’ Ex-GOP lawmaker tees off after Trump calls himself a ‘war hero’

A former member of Congress unloaded on CNN on Tuesday evening after the president referred to himself as a “war hero” during a radio interview.

During an interview with conservative radio host Mark Levin, President Donald Trump described Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “war hero” for his actions in GazaTrump added that he should also be known as a war hero because he approved of the bombing mission that destroyed Iran’s nuclear facility.

“Nobody cares, but I am too,” Trump said, referring to himself as a hero. “I sent those planes.”

Adam Kinzinger, a former Air National Guard officer, discussed Trump’s comments on CNN’s “Erin Burnett OutFront.”

“This is nuts!” Kinzinger, who represented Illinois in Congress as a Republican for more than a decade, shouted. “This is nuts, and his people are going to find a way to justify this.”

“Listen, when they were putting out something honoring the Army’s 250th anniversary, they put out a picture of Donald Trump in his military academy uniform,” he continued. “Which has nothing to do with the military except that they drill you.”

“This is nuts. He’s not a war hero,” Kinzinger said. “You can like what he’s done. That’s fine. I hope he gets a resolution in Ukraine, but to put himself on the same level as people who have actually gone out and served this country, not claimed bone spurs, is an offense to anybody who’s served.”

Watch the entire clip by clicking here.

https://www.rawstory.com/adam-kinzinger-2673902589

LGBTQ Nation: Kristi Noem defends DHS speechwriter’s racist, antisemitic, anti-LGBTQ+ social media posts

Eric Lendrum has told followers to vandalize LGBTQ+ art displays and to stop LGBTQ+-inclusive education “by any means necessary.”

Eric Lendrum, a speechwriter for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has expressed racist, antisemitic, and anti-LGBTQ+ views on social media and in podcast appearances as recently as this year. The DHS, led by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, has defended Lendrum by pointing out his free speech rights.

Lendrum is currently listed as a DHS speechwriter. He previously worked as a press assistant for the Department of the Interior during the first Trump administration.

From December 2017 to March 2025 — the same month he reported started working at DHS — Lendrum also wrote for conservative website American Greatness, and hosted his The Right Take podcast from at least January 2021 to May 2023, according to NOTUS, which first reported on his hateful digital footprint.

In one December 2021 American Greatness post, he defended the MAGA rioters who attacked the U.S. Capitol building on January 6 as “peaceful protesters,” and compared what he described as the “dehumanization” of American conservatives to that of enslaved Africans in the U.S. and Jews in Nazi Germany.

On his podcast, Lendrum described seeing Democratic members of Congress “crouching under their chairs” during the January 6 insurrection as “gratifying.” In an October 2022 episode, he endorsed the white supremacist “great replacement theory” as “real.” The racist and anti-Semitic white supremacist theory claims that rich Jews want to “replace” white Americans and Westerners with non-white immigrants and people of color (especially Black people and Muslims) to fundamentally change the nation’s racial makeup and political culture.

As NOTUS notes, on an April 2023 episode, Lendrum vowed to “always properly deadname tr**ny freaks” and to continue using the anti-trans slur.

“I will keep calling them tr**nies because I know it’s derogatory, and I know they freakin’ hate it. That’s why I deadname them. That’s why I use their original pronouns,” he said. “You control the language. Don’t give these freaks an inch on the language.”

Even more disturbingly, he argued that “We need to eradicate transgenderism. Wipe it off the face of the Earth. Destroy it. Get rid of it.” Lendrum did clarify that he was “not saying get rid of the people. I’m saying eliminate the ideology. Cure these people.” However, as NOTUS notes, he did not include a similar disclaimer in a November 2024 X post calling for trans eradication.

“The evil ideology of transgenderism must be ERADICATED from the face of the earth, once and for all. Nothing of it must remain,” he wrote. “Real justice must be done.”

Much of Lendrum’s anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric cited in the NOTUS report comes from his X account, @realEricLendrum, where he also described asylum seekers as “illegal scum” in a September 2023 post.

According to the outlet, his April 2023 post equated trans people to “child molesters.” That same month, he responded to trans activists protesting against Florida’s restrictions on teaching about sexuality and gender identity in schools, writing that “This must be stopped, by any means necessary.”

In a February 2024 post seemingly responding to the arrest of a 19-year-old for defacing a rainbow-colored intersection dedicated to the victims and survivors of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting, he called on “more people” to “go out and actively vandalize that hideous display, in a further show of solidarity and a middle finger to the gay agenda.”

In August 2024, he posted that being LGBTQ+ “literally is a choice.”

“There is no ‘gay gene,’” he wrote. “And if being ‘trans’ isn’t a choice, then why do people have to undergo certain treatments in order to ‘become trans’?” Almost all major American medical and psychological associations consider sexual orientation and gender identity to be determined by a combination of inborn genetics and external social factors that are primarily outside of a person’s choosing.

After Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde pleaded with President Donald Trump to have “mercy” on LGBTQ+ people and immigrants at a prayer service ahead of his second inauguration in January, Lendrum attacked Budde on X.

“Lock this freak up,” he wrote, adding that children who identify as LGBTQ+ “are being sexually and psychologically abused by their parents.” His rhetoric echoes that of numerous right-wing politicians and influencers who think that queer people and allies are “grooming” and “sexualizing” children simply by existing and acknowledging the existence of other queer individuals.

According to NOTUS, a description of Lendrum’s role as speechwriter on the DHS Office of Public Affairs’ website specifies that his duties include preparing “speeches, talking points, editorials, Congressional testimony, video scripts, web content and other written content” for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. As the outlet notes, the agency has drawn criticism in recent weeks for a social media post aimed at recruiting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents that appeared to reference a notorious 1978 White Nationalist book.

NOTUS and other outlets reported that DHS has declined to answer questions about Lendrum’s hateful comments or its vetting process, responding only with a link to the text of the First Amendment, which says (in part): “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.”

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/08/kristi-noem-defends-dhs-speechwriters-anti-lgbtq-social-media-posts

Raw Story: ‘Nuts!’ Ex-GOP lawmaker tees off after Trump calls himself a ‘war hero’

A former member of Congress unloaded on CNN on Tuesday evening after the president referred to himself as a “war hero” during a radio interview.

During an interview with conservative radio host Mark Levin, President Donald Trump described Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “war hero” for his actions in GazaTrump added that he should also be known as a war hero because he approved of the bombing mission that destroyed Iran’s nuclear facility.

“Nobody cares, but I am too,” Trump said, referring to himself as a hero. “I sent those planes.”

Adam Kinzinger, a former Air National Guard officer, discussed Trump’s comments on CNN’s “Erin Burnett OutFront.”

“This is nuts!” Kinzinger, who represented Illinois in Congress as a Republican for more than a decade, shouted. “This is nuts, and his people are going to find a way to justify this.”

“Listen, when they were putting out something honoring the Army’s 250th anniversary, they put out a picture of Donald Trump in his military academy uniform,” he continued. “Which has nothing to do with the military except that they drill you.”

“This is nuts. He’s not a war hero,” Kinzinger said. “You can like what he’s done. That’s fine. I hope he gets a resolution in Ukraine, but to put himself on the same level as people who have actually gone out and served this country, not claimed bone spurs, is an offense to anybody who’s served.”

Watch the entire clip by clicking here.

https://www.rawstory.com/adam-kinzinger-2673902589

Newsweek: Donald Trump suffers major immigration legal blow

Afederal judge in Illinois has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration that sought to block the state’s workplace privacy law on the grounds that it conflicted with federal immigration enforcement.

In a ruling issued on August 19, Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois rejected the administration’s arguments, finding that the Illinois Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act is not preempted by federal immigration law.

Why It Matters

The ruling matters because it draws a clearer boundary between federal immigration power and state authority over workplace regulation. By rejecting the Trump administration’s effort to use immigration law to override Illinois’ privacy protections, Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman reaffirmed that states retain broad authority to govern employment relationships.

The decision safeguards workers’ procedural rights in the hiring process, could set a precedent for other states considering similar measures, and marks a significant check on the expansion of federal enforcement authority.

What To Know

The case centered on whether federal law—particularly the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA)—supersedes state-level employment protections. The administration argued that provisions of Illinois’ law regulating the use of the federal E-Verify system and protecting employees during the employment verification process interfered with federal immigration authority.

Coleman disagreed, concluding that the state law “is not expressly preempted by IRCA and does not intrude upon the federal government’s constitutional powers in the space of immigration and foreign affairs.” She added that the government’s “broad interpretation of its power to regulate matters of immigration would swallow the historic powers of the states over employment-related issues”.

The Federal Government’s Argument

The Trump administration claimed that several provisions of Illinois’ privacy law—including penalties for violations related to E-Verify—constituted sanctions on employers of unauthorized workers and therefore fell under IRCA’s preemption clause. That provision bars states from imposing civil or criminal sanctions on employers who hire or recruit unauthorized workers/aliens.

The Justice Department also argued that Illinois’ law, by imposing notification requirements and other conditions on the use of E-Verify, conflicted with the federal goal of deterring unauthorized employment.

At oral argument, however, Coleman noted that government lawyers struggled to identify precisely which sections of Illinois law they believed were preempted. In her ruling, she wrote that the administration’s interpretation of IRCA’s preemption clause was “broad to the point of absurdity.”

Judge’s Reasoning

Coleman emphasized that employment regulation has historically been a power of the states. “States possess broad authority under their police powers to regulate the employment relationship to protect workers within the State,” she wrote, citing Supreme Court precedent.

The judge found that Illinois’ law does not penalize employers for hiring unauthorized workers but rather regulates how employers use verification systems and ensures employees’ rights are respected during that process. “A person’s immigration or work authorization status is irrelevant to determine whether an employer has violated any of the provisions of the act,” Coleman explained.

She further rejected the administration’s conflict preemption argument, which claimed that Illinois’ law undermined federal objectives. The government suggested that the state’s notification rules could encourage unauthorized workers to evade detection. Coleman dismissed this as “simply too speculative a basis on which to rest a finding of pre-emption.”

Broader Implications

The ruling represents a significant legal setback for Trump’s immigration agenda, which has frequently sought to expand federal authority over state and local policies. By upholding Illinois’ privacy protections, the court reaffirmed the principle that federal power over immigration does not automatically override state employment laws.

The decision may carry consequences beyond Illinois. Other states have enacted or considered similar laws governing the use of E-Verify and employee privacy. Coleman’s opinion suggests that such measures, when designed to regulate employment rather than immigration status, may withstand federal challenges.

Newsweek contacted the Department of Justice for comment via email outside of regular working hours on Wednesday.

What People Are Saying

Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman wrote in her ruling that Illinois’ workplace privacy law “is not expressly preempted by IRCA and does not intrude upon the federal government’s constitutional powers in the space of immigration and foreign affairs.” She added that the administration’s interpretation of federal law was, “broad to the point of absurdity.”

Kyle Cheney of Politico wrote on X, August 20, 2025, “A federal judge in Illinois has thrown out the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the state that claims IL’s workforce privacy law conflicts with federal immigration enforcement.”

In a broader context, legal scholars and state officials have long debated the limits of federal power in immigration enforcement.

Ilya Somin, professor of law at George Mason University, told the Washington Post in 2017: “Trump and future presidents could use [the executive order] to seriously undermine constitutional federalism by forcing dissenting cities and states to obey presidential dictates, even without authorization from Congress. The circumvention of Congress makes the order a threat to separation of powers, as well.”

What Happens Next

The Trump administration is expected to appeal to the Seventh Circuit, with a possible path to the Supreme Court. For now, Illinois’ workplace privacy law remains in effect, and the ruling could inspire other states to adopt similar protections while intensifying debates over federal versus state authority.

Judge Coleman emphasized that federal immigration power “is not without limits,” and that preemption requires a clear conflict. By leaving Illinois’ law intact and denying an injunction, the ruling marks a notable legal setback for Trump’s immigration strategy.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-immigration-legal-setback-illinois-workplace-privacy-2116468

Slingshot News: ‘I’m Not Going To Discuss Anything’: Pam Bondi Plugs Her Ears, Tunes Out Of Hearing When Asked Questions She Doesn’t Like In Hearing

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/i-m-not-going-to-discuss-anything-pam-bondi-plugs-her-ears-tunes-out-of-hearing-when-asked-questions-she-doesn-t-like-in-hearing/vi-AA1KRowU

Slingshot News: ‘We Will Take A Look’: Sec. Kristi Noem Dodges Questions On Illegality Of Masked ICE Agents In House Hearing

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/we-will-take-a-look-sec-kristi-noem-dodges-questions-on-illegality-of-masked-ice-agents-in-house-hearing/vi-AA1KRpQO

Raw Story: ‘Please reconsider’: GOP senators plead with Trump to stand down from latest fight

President Donald Trump’s ploy to bully Senate Republicans into dropping a longstanding rule about presidential nominations appears to have crashed and burned, Politico reported on Tuesday — with lawmakers holding their ground against him in a way they generally dare not do.

The drama began in July, when Trump lashed out at 91-year-old Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA), calling him “weak and ineffective” and demanding he axe “blue slips,” the tradition that committees must have the approval of a nominee’s home state senators to advance a nominee.

Republicans already weakened blue slip rules for circuit court nominees in 2017, which is how Trump’s former personal lawyer Emil Bove got a circuit court appointment earlier this year despite objections from both of New Jersey’s senators. But they have been adamantly against eliminating them for district court judges or executive nominations.

Grassley pushed back, taking umbrage at Trump’s “personal insults” against him, and the broader Senate GOP caucus followed suit. According to Politico, there’s no sign of the GOP backing down — they may tinker with nomination rules to speed up confirmations on the Senate floor, but they won’t eliminate blue slips or weaken the committee vetting process.

Unlike in many other cases of resistance against Trump, where GOP lawmakers have given quotes anonymously, some senators are being quite open in rebuffing the president, with Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) telling Politico, “As a practical matter, the Senate’s not going to give up the blue slip. So my appeal to the president is: please reconsider. Why do we want to have this fight for nothing?”

There’s a key reason GOP senators don’t want to undermine their rules for Trump’s benefit here, strategists told Politico: they know it would backfire on them.

Mike Fragoso, a former adviser to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), “argued that even Republicans wary of crossing the president now have taken advantage of the blue slip policy when Democrats held power. He added that there are relatively few bench seats in solidly Democratic states that Trump could even fill now without consent from Democrats,” noted the report. This means Trump would get very few judges nominated by totally eliminating blue slips, but a future Democratic president could flood red states with district court judges of their own.

Beyond judges, however, Trump is being stymied by blue slips when it comes to appointing federal prosecutors.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has blocked Jay Clayton’s confirmation to be U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, while New Jersey’s senators have blocked another personal Trump lawyer, Alina Habba, for the prosecutor office there, prompting a standoff where Trump’s Justice Department has skirted rules and reversed decisions of local judges to install her on an acting basis.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-grassley-2673900010