Trump’s 18-0 Winning Streak At SCOTUS Underscores The Problem Of Rogue Judges
President Trump can expect to win many more reversals of flawed lower court rulings that liberal judges are rendering against him.President Trump can expect to win many more reversals of flawed lower court rulings that liberal judges are rendering against him.Assassinations Will Continue Until The GOP Creates Real Consequences For Leftist Violence
Charlie Kirk — a generational voice of the conservative movement — was assassinated Wednesday while hosting one of his famous campus discussion events. We still don’t know the identity of the shooter, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know who is responsible. Radical leftists bear great blame for engaging in inflammatory rhetoric that can only […]Trump’s new judge pick: True constitutionalist or hidden Democrat?
President Donald Trump's nomination of Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebecca Taibleson for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has prompted questions about the extent of her alignment with the administration's conservative values, particularly in light of her and her husband's political donations to Democrats.
Trump's first term was undermined by several appointments that did not fully align with the administration's priorities, leading to setbacks in key legal battles and policy implementation. The president admitted that he received "bad advice ... on numerous Judicial Nominations," expressing that he was "very disappointed" with some of those picks.
'She brings an exceptional legal mind and a firm dedication to interpreting the law as written, not bending it to fit a political agenda.'
Mike Davis, a Trump ally and the founder of Article III Project, stated that the president's second administration would not make that same mistake again and instead would focus on selecting judges who are "even more bold and fearless" and have been "battle-tested."
Trump announced Taibleson's nomination in August, writing in a social media post, "It is my Great Honor to nominate Rebecca Taibleson to serve as a Judge on the United States Court of Appeals, for the Seventh Circuit, in the Great State of Wisconsin. Rebecca brings a wealth of EXPERIENCE AND SUCCESS, from her time as Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin and, formerly, as Assistant to the United States Solicitor General."
"Rebecca has learned from some of the BEST and most HIGHLY RESPECTED Legal Minds in the Country, having clerked for United States Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Antonin Scalia. Rebecca will make a fantastic Judge who will fearlessly defend the Constitution, and strongly uphold the Rule of Law. Congratulations Rebecca!" Trump added.
While Taibleson, 42, meets all legal qualifications, having earned her J.D. from Yale Law, her background raises questions about her political leanings. In fact, her conservative critics have been quick to highlight that she and her husband have a history of donating to Democrats.
RELATED: Rogue judges voted to replace Trump-chosen US attorney Alina Habba. DOJ fights fire with fire.
Taibleson donated in 2022 to Joe Manchin, a former Democratic senator from West Virginia, through ActBlue, and in 2024 to Bridget Schoenborn, a judge nominated by Democratic Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers. However, she also donated to Mike Gallagher, a former Republican representative, and WINRED in 2016 and 2020, respectively.
Blaze News reached out to Taibleson for comment.
Her husband, Benjamin Taibleson, contributed to Joe Biden's 2020 presidential campaign against Trump, Kamala Harris' Senate campaign in 2015, and Forrest Dunbar, a Democratic member of the Alaska Senate.
Despite these donations to Democrats and other elements of her record that appear to her conservative critics at odds with the administration's priorities, Davis and the Article III Project have expressed their support for Taibleson.
"President Trump continues to deliver on his promise to appoint bold and fearless judges who will defend the Constitution and uphold the rule of law," Davis said. "His latest nomination of Rebecca Taibleson to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is a testament to his unwavering commitment to restoring a judiciary grounded in constitutional principles and judicial restraint. She brings an exceptional legal mind and a firm dedication to interpreting the law as written, not bending it to fit a political agenda."
"As President Trump further reshapes the federal judiciary with judges who understand their role is to interpret the law, not make it, the Article III Project stands ready to support Taibleson through every step of the confirmation process. We are committed to ensuring the American people get the impartial, constitutionally faithful judges they deserve," Davis added.
RELATED: 'Monumental victory': Trump applauds Supreme Court for disabling Democrats' biggest weapon
Taibleson's conservative supporters have pointed to her experience working as a clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia and Judge Brett Kavanaugh, even advocating for Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination, as proof of her commitment to uphold similar values. However, critics dispute this claim, noting that Scalia was known for hiring counter-clerks, or politically liberal clerks, and that Kavanaugh has been suspected of employing a similar practice.
For example, Department of Justice lawyer Danielle Sassoon opposed Trump's attempt to dismiss charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Law professor Rachel Barkow stated that Trump's "use of the pardon power is part of his effort to put the country on an authoritarian path." Former Judge Michael Luttig described Trump as "a clear and present danger to American democracy." Notably, all four individuals were former clerks for Scalia.
Some of Taibleson's conservative supporters also point to her time with the Solicitor General's office beginning in the first Trump administration. However, she remained on with the Biden administration through 2022, including defending Biden's student loan forgiveness policy in a lawsuit brought by the Brown County Taxpayers Association.
As Taibleson's confirmation process unfolds, various aspects of her record will likely spark ongoing debate about whether she fully embodies the bold constitutionalism Trump has pledged for his judicial nominees, or whether potential misalignments could mirror the challenges faced during his first term.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
SCOTUS’ ICE Ruling Is The Latest Embarrassment For Rogue Lower Courts
'Consistency and neutrality are hallmarks of good judging, and in my view, we abide by those enduring judicial values in this case by granting the stay.'SCOTUS Greenlights Mississippi’s Social Media Age-Verification Law (For Now)
On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court declined a request to block Mississippi’s social media age-verification law from going into effect (for now). In a two-page order, the high court rejected a motion from NetChoice — an internet trade association — to “reinstate a lower court’s order protecting social media giants like Meta, X and YouTube […]Justice Kavanaugh Highlights Separation Of Powers Issue Congress Keeps Making Worse
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh identified a foundational issue impacting America’s separation of powers during a rare sit-down interview on Thursday. The moment came during a discussion with District Judge Sarah E. Pitlyk at this year’s Eighth Circuit Judicial Conference. Pitlyk previously clerked for Kavanaugh when he was a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court […]Three Years Too Late, Kagan Condemns Leftist Threats Against SCOTUS
It only took three years, but Associate Justice Elena Kagan finally found it within herself to condemn leftist threats against her Republican-appointed colleagues — and it’s not hard to guess why. Speaking at a judicial conference in California on Thursday, the Obama appointee discussed the “threats to personal safety” and an “endangerment of judges.” She […]SCOTUS Hands Trump Win In Consumer Product Safety Commission Case
The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily agreed on Wednesday that President Trump can fire three Democrat members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. In its 6-3 decision, the justices granted an application filed by the Trump administration to stay a June 13 district court order attempting to block the president from firing the officials in question. […]Democrats find loophole that could continue birthright citizenship for illegal aliens
Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that restricted the ability of judges to block President Trump’s policies using nationwide injunctions, a federal court has barred the Trump administration from enforcing his executive order limiting birthright citizenship nationwide.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante in Concord, New Hampshire, made the ruling on July 10 after being asked to grant class action status to a lawsuit filed seeking to represent infants who would not qualify for citizenship under Trump’s directive.
“You might be able to blame Kavanaugh’s concurrence in the CASA decision for this,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments.
“You look at the CASA decision, and the majority decision from Chief Justice Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett said, ‘Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to the federal courts.’ However, you had Kavanaugh in his concurrence who left the door open for what the judge is trying to do,” Gonzales explains.
“The decision today will not alter this Court’s traditional role in those matters. Going forward, in the wake of a major new federal statute or executive action, different district courts may enter a slew of preliminary rulings on the legality of that statute or executive action,” Kavanaugh said. “Or alternatively, perhaps a district court (or courts) will grant or deny the functional equivalent of a universal injunction — for example, by granting or denying a preliminary injunction to a putative nationwide class under Rule 23(b)(2).”
“I’m getting in the weeds here, but it matters,” Gonzales says, explaining that “in order to have a judge take class action, you’ve got to have rule 23.”
“It lays out the criteria. Numerosity: So you’ve got a class that’s so big that individual lawsuits are impractical. You’ve got to lump them all together because not doing so would cause too many lawsuits to happen,” she continues.
“Commonality: There are common legal or factual questions among class members. Typicality: The named plaintiff’s claims are typical of the whole class. Adequacy: So the plaintiffs and their attorneys will fairly and accurately protect the interests of the entire class. And then rule 23(b), which, of course, Kavanaugh referenced, is the injunctive relief for that class,” she adds.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com