And that\u2019s exactly what the far-right planned all along.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s the headline stat: Trump wins 69% of cases before Trump-appointed district judges.<\/p>\n
Now compare that to:<\/p>\n
- \n
- 21% win rate before non-Trump Republican appointees<\/li>\n
- 38.6% win rate before Democratic appointees<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Earlier Republican-appointed judges \u2014 the supposedly conservative stalwarts \u2014 rule against Trump at a rate approaching four out of five cases. That means Trump\u2019s 69% success rate before his own appointees isn\u2019t some partisan alignment, but rather a notable statistical anomaly. Because if this were merely about ideology, you\u2019d expect pre-Trump Republican judges and Trump judges to land in roughly the same neighborhood. But in reality, the gulf is enormous between conservatives and MAGA judges. The latter has turned out to be a cohort of judges who function as reliable validators of Trump\u2019s executive power.<\/p>\n
Remember how Trump and his allies dismissed concerns about qualifications<\/a> during his first term? Remember the parade of nominees<\/a> rated \u201cNot Qualified\u201d by the ABA? Remember when competence was treated as optional so long as the nominee was ideologically pure and politically dependable?<\/p>\n
Instead of prioritizing institutionalists steeped in judicial norms, Trump prioritized true believers \u2014 candidates vetted not just for conservatism, but for their willingness to advance an expansive view of executive authority aligned with Trump\u2019s agenda. Trump\u2019s bet was that loyalty and ideological rigidity matter more than broad professional consensus or institutional temperament. The data suggests that bet has paid off for him.<\/p>\n
For the rule of law? That\u2019s another question entirely.<\/p>\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2021\/06\/IMG_5243-1-scaled-e1623338814705-620x568.jpg?resize=174%2C160&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her<\/a> with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Mastodon @Kathryn1@mastodon.social.<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\nThe post How Trump\u2019s True Believer Judges Are Warping The Federal Courts<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2026\/03\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-5-2026-01_48_23-PM-200x300.png?resize=200%2C300&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(via ChatGPT)\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Overall, Donald Trump and his administration prevailed in just 41% of district court cases and 45% of circuit court cases. That\u2019s\u2026 embarrassing. (Well, what\u2019s truly embarrassing for our form of government is the eye-popping 84% win rate Trump jumps to at the highest court in the land, thanks in large part to a steady stream of shadow-docket interventions.)<\/p>\n
But a new report<\/a> from Court Accountability shows something much more alarming than a middling win rate (in courts below SCOTUS). It reveals that Trump-appointed judges are statistical outliers who are dramatically more likely to rule for him than any other bloc of judges, including Republicans appointed by prior GOP presidents.<\/p>\n
And that\u2019s exactly what the far-right planned all along.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s the headline stat: Trump wins 69% of cases before Trump-appointed district judges.<\/p>\n
Now compare that to:<\/p>\n
- \n
- 21% win rate before non-Trump Republican appointees<\/li>\n
- 38.6% win rate before Democratic appointees<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Earlier Republican-appointed judges \u2014 the supposedly conservative stalwarts \u2014 rule against Trump at a rate approaching four out of five cases. That means Trump\u2019s 69% success rate before his own appointees isn\u2019t some partisan alignment, but rather a notable statistical anomaly. Because if this were merely about ideology, you\u2019d expect pre-Trump Republican judges and Trump judges to land in roughly the same neighborhood. But in reality, the gulf is enormous between conservatives and MAGA judges. The latter has turned out to be a cohort of judges who function as reliable validators of Trump\u2019s executive power.<\/p>\n
Remember how Trump and his allies dismissed concerns about qualifications<\/a> during his first term? Remember the parade of nominees<\/a> rated \u201cNot Qualified\u201d by the ABA? Remember when competence was treated as optional so long as the nominee was ideologically pure and politically dependable?<\/p>\n
Instead of prioritizing institutionalists steeped in judicial norms, Trump prioritized true believers \u2014 candidates vetted not just for conservatism, but for their willingness to advance an expansive view of executive authority aligned with Trump\u2019s agenda. Trump\u2019s bet was that loyalty and ideological rigidity matter more than broad professional consensus or institutional temperament. The data suggests that bet has paid off for him.<\/p>\n
For the rule of law? That\u2019s another question entirely.<\/p>\n
\nKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her<\/a> with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Mastodon @[email\u00a0protected].<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Overall, Donald Trump and his administration prevailed in just 41% of district court cases and 45% of circuit court cases. That\u2019s\u2026 embarrassing. (Well, what\u2019s truly embarrassing for our form of government is the eye-popping 84% win rate Trump jumps to at the highest court in the land, thanks in large part to a steady stream […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":145458,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-145457","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/IMG_5243-1-scaled-e1623338814705-620x568-kQM9n2.jpg?fit=620%2C568&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/145457","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=145457"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/145457\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/145458"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=145457"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=145457"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=145457"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}