This statement by @SenToomey may be his finest moment in public life. Clear and direct at a crucial moment in our nation's history. An act of real patriotism.
Many are responding to this to point out that his statement comes late. They're right of course. A big reason why we're in such danger now is that Republicans in Congress spent the past 2 weeks, and the past 4+ years, not speaking up like this.
I've been a harsh Toomey critic for years. If anyone bashed him longer or louder than I have for blocking Obama's nomination of the Third Circuit's first black woman, I'm not aware of it. One good statement doesn't erase any of that history.

Still: it's a damn good statement.
Credit where it's due. And we need more like it from other sitting GOP leaders, right now.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Matthew Stiegler

Matthew Stiegler Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MatthewStiegler

22 Nov
Conservative twitter is erupting w these Obama-judge takes, but it's all delusional. Judge Brann was a Federalist Society member who served on the Pa. GOP State Comm, on his county Republican committee for 18 years. He reportedly was picked by Toomey.…
Judge Brann's nomination questionnaire: "I currently serve as the Republican State Committeeman for Bradford County, Chairman of the Northeast Caucus of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania, and as a member of the Leadership Committee of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania."
Read 6 tweets
27 Oct
The argument most commonly advanced against Ds adding Supreme Court seats is that doing so would inevitably lead to Rs adding more seats and endless rounds of expansion.

Here's why Ds and progressives shouldn't take that argument seriously.
1. To add seats, the GOP would need control of the presidency and both houses of Congress. Getting all 3 any time soon is FAR less of a sure thing than they want you to think.

It never happened at any point during the presidency of Nixon. Or Ford. Or Reagan. Or Bush I.
2. And Ds expanding the Court would make it still less a sure thing. It'd be a whole helluva lot harder for this GOP to retake all 3 if an expanded Scotus helped level the playing field by barring wild partisan gerrymanders and naked vote-suppression.…
Read 13 tweets
18 Sep
Don't recall seeing this before. The Third Circuit just issued a precedential opinion authored by Judge McKee. A footnote to the last sentence of the opinion states simply, "Judge Porter concurs in the judgment," but no separate opinion.…
I don't doubt it's happened before in CA3, but it's definitely rare.
In plain english, what happened here is that one judge agreed with the other 2 about which side wins the appeal, but did not agree about why, but did not explain his own view. It's that last part that's unusual.
Read 6 tweets
3 Sep
A few thoughts on applying for clerkships from an appellate practitioner’s perspective, inspired by @RMFifthCircuit's tweet below.

1. Law students tend to be too focused on the prestige of the judge and the court.

2. Don’t overlook younger judges. Sure that clerkship may dazzle your classmates less, but that younger judge may be on the bench through decades more of your legal career than those better-known senior judges are.
3. Practicing where you clerked is exceptionally valuable, so if you know where you plan to practice give the judges there an extra-long look.
Read 5 tweets
15 Aug
Ack. I just deleted a tweet because I think I was mistaken.

It said the Trump campaign didn't comply with the court's order, but as @Jaime_ASantos and others kindly pointed out, they probably didn't need to file their response *on the docket.*

Sorry, world. Image
The district court ordered the Trump campaign to "respond" to discovery requests made by the Democratic party and other defendants in the case. The order directed them to "provide supplemental responses and documents" by yesterday. When I checked the docket this morning and ...
... didn't see anything, I was startled. Without thinking carefully enough first, I figured that meant that they didn't comply with the court's order. Hence my tweet.

What I failed to realize was that the order did not require the campaign to file their response ...
Read 7 tweets
14 Aug
Yes, Trump has appointed 2 Supreme Court justices and lots and lots of federal judges. But that isn't the real issue.

The real issue is that the Senate GOP cheated.

They stole the Scotus swing seat. And they blockaded Obama from filling any circuit seats for over 2 years. 1/
In case you've forgotten. 2/…
If Dems get the presidency and the Senate (big if), the right will be hair-on-fire frantic to scare Dems out of taking decisive action to fix the courts. No new Scotus seats, return to blue slips, only cautious picks, etc etc. 3/
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!