// 1/28/18 //
The House and Senate passed a three-week-long spending bill, clearing a path to end the shutdown of the federal government (WaPo, WSJ, NYT).
- The Washington Post examines the winners and losers.
- Democrats caved and they’re admitting it, writes Aaron Blake at WaPo.
- Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was wise to back down, writes Carter Eskew at WaPo.
- The bill includes more tax cuts (NYT).
- Politico reports that some liberals are livid.
A government shutdown began on the morning of Saturday, January 20th after the Senate blocked a continuing resolution (NYTimes, Politico, WaPo, WSJ).
- President Trump is taking only a minor role in negotiations to end the shutdown, report Josh Dawsey and Ashley Parker in the Washington Post.
- The shutdown is unlikely to reverse or stop ongoing economic growth, at least in the short term (WSJ).
- The increasing prevalence of government shutdowns reflects a breakdown in political norms, argues Gerard Magliocca at Concurring Opinions.
- Many agencies will be able to maintain partial operations (WSJ).
- The federal government will likely have to spend millions of dollars to cover shutdown-related expenses (Politico).
- The FCC plans to remain open through January 26th (The Hill).
- But many SEC activities will pause (WSJ).
- The shutdown is a product of an outdated budget process, suggests Peter Suderman in the New York Times,
Michael Brennan, President Trump’s nominee for a position on the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, faced a confirmation hearing. Democrats pressed him on a law review article criticizing stare decisis (Courthouse News).
President Trump’s ability to reshape the judiciary may be overstated, suggests Russell Wheeler at the Brookings Institution Blog.
President Trump nominated John Nalbandian, a Kentucky attorney, for a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Cincinnati.com).
While President Trump’s unqualified judicial nominees have attracted significant press attention, his most alarming nominees are those with strong credentials, contends Dahlia Lithwick at Slate.
Under President Trump, the Senate has not engaged in its customary independent review of judicial nominees, argues Todd Ruger in Roll Call.