A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. This maxim comes to mind when journalists who lack any legal background attempt to engage in complicated empirical studies of judicial decisions.
The latest headline from the New York Times is titled "Trump's 'Superstar' Appellate Judges Have Voted 133 to 12 in His Favor."
But the data suggests that in the 13 appellate courts, there is increasingly such a thing as a Trump judge. The president's appointees voted to allow his policies to take effect 133 times and voted against them only 12 times. . . .
The Times analyzed every judicial ruling on Mr. Trump's second-term agenda, from Jan. 20 to Dec. 31 of last year, or more than 500 orders issued across 900 cases. About half of rulings at the appellate level were in Mr. Trump's favor — better than his performance with the district courts, though worse than his record at the Supreme Court, where the rulings on his agenda have almost all been on a preliminary basis in response to emergency applications.
