By: Brian Evans

President Trump has now added his tenth nominee to what has historically been a very, very liberal Federal 9th Circuit Court Of Appeals!  Already, President Trump had nominated and had confirmed to the 9th Circuit Danielle Hunsaker and Patrick Bumatay, which made the court nearly balanced, as President Trump’s picks have been strong constitutional conservatives to the bench. Now, with the nomination and confirmation next month of Lawrence VanDyke, the radical left will no longer dominate the circuit! reported that…

President Donald Trump has ushered in the end of an era — no more will liberals dominate the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and use the federal appellate court as a rubber stamp for defeating pro-life legislation and pushing abortion on demand.

Today the U.S. Senate voted to confirm Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lawrence VanDyke to serve on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. President Trump nominated VanDyke in September.

Lawrence VanDyke graduated from Harvard Law School with high honors. Prior to his nomination to the 9th Circuit, VanDyke served as deputy assistant attorney general at the Department of Justice. He has extensive experience serving as solicitor general in both Montana and Nevada, as well as in private practice.

Leading pro-life groups celebrated his confirmation.

“We congratulate Lawrence VanDyke on his confirmation. He will be an outstanding addition to the 9th Circuit,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “His distinguished record makes him highly qualified to serve on the federal bench. He is a committed and strong constitutionalist who will uphold the values and deeply held beliefs of our nation. VanDyke joins the ranks of over 150 judges confirmed to the court by President Trump – judges of the highest caliber with respect for the Constitution and the rights of all people. We are very pleased to see him confirmed.”

However, the radical left-wing Mainstream Media and Socialist Democrats were outraged, as they saw their grasp on the court fade away more and more, with each nomination and confirmation! For example, just a few of the radical left-wing writers like at Slate wrote how they were against his concerns that his pro-marriage Christian stance, as well as his concerns about lesbians and gays raising children, were outrageous and disqualifying. They wrote…

VanDyke has a long record as an anti-LGBTQ activist. He wrote in 2004 that marriage equality “will hurt families, and consequentially children and society.” As the solicitor general of Montana, he advocated for the state to join two briefs alleging that legal recognition of same-sex relationships would harm children. The first claimed that prohibiting same-sex marriage promoted “optimal childrearing” because same-sex couples “cannot provide” the optimal “family structure.” And the second asserted that states “may rationally conclude” that “it is better” for parents to have a “biological” connection to their children. (The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that a same-sex marriage ban “humiliates” the children of gay couples.) In 2010, VanDyke also filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to rule that student groups at public universities have a First Amendment right to discriminate against LGBTQ students.

In light of this record, the ABA expressed concern over whether “VanDyke would be fair to persons who are gay, lesbian, or otherwise part of the LGBTQ community.” During VanDyke’s confirmation hearing, Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley asked him if the ABA was right to worry. Do you believe, Hawley asked sympathetically, that you would treat LGBTQ litigants unfairly? “I do not believe that,” VanDyke said. Then he started crying. “It is a fundamental belief of mine that all people are created in the image of God,” he insisted. “They should all be treated with dignity and respect.” The victimizer had become the victim.

VanDyke, a longtime member of the Federalist Society, brought that group’s priorities to the Montana solicitor general’s office. He threw the state into a case challenging a federal law banning those under 21 from buying handguns, arguing that the ban “probably does violate the original meaning of the Second Amendment” because “18-year-olds were part of the ‘militia.’ ” He also defended a bizarre Montana statute that attempted to nullify federal law by declaring Montana-made firearms “not subject to federal law or regulation.” In internal emails, VanDyke acknowledged that his argument may not pass “the straight-face test.” Unsurprisingly, VanDyke also co-authored a brief defending 20-week abortion bans and urging the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade wholesale.

Also, the Huffington Post reported how the gun-grabbing Giffords and her anti-second Amendment group warned about VanDyke’s pro-Constitution and Second Amendment stance was deeply concerning to the left! They wrote…

Giffords’ group claims his “dangerous positions on firearm policy and fealty to a gun-lobby agenda, alone, render him unfit to serve on the federal bench.”

“Giffords Law Center is compelled to warn this committee about VanDyke’s nomination because of his uniquely troublesome record,” says a forthcoming letter to the chairman and ranking member on the committee, obtained by HuffPost. “VanDyke’s dangerous commitment to gun lobby groups that oppose all firearm regulations and his advocacy for extreme, unconstitutional, and legally unsupported views on gun policy and the Second Amendment disqualify him for a life-tenured seat on the federal bench.”

The gun safety organization raises several concerns with VanDyke’s nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

In his 2014 bid for solicitor general of Montana, VanDyke claimed that all “gun control laws are misdirected” and vowed to oppose basic gun safety measures, such as tighter background checks. As solicitor general, he vigorously defended a state law that purported to exempt all firearms and ammunition manufactured and kept in Montana from federal law or regulation. When that law was struck down as unconstitutional, VanDyke responded by petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court for a review and arguing that the court should revisit precedents on congressional powers to invalidate the federal gun laws Montana had already chosen to disregard, including restrictions on machine guns, silencers and short-barreled rifles.

Giffords was joined with the “Coalition to stop gun violence”, as they stated

“The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence strongly opposes the nomination of VanDyke to the Ninth Circuit. In the words of the American Bar Association, VanDyke has shown himself to be lazy, arrogant, an ideologue, and not qualified for the position for which he has been nominated. Lawrence VanDyke’s own words have indicated that he is unable to serve as a fair and impartial justice on the issue of guns and gun violence prevention. The answers that he chose in the 2014 Montana Candidate Questionnaire from the National Rifle Association (NRA) paint a troubling picture. VanDyke selected boxes that stated all ‘gun laws are misdirected,’ that he would oppose any attempt at universal background checks, and that he would work to repeal restrictions on carrying guns in banks, government buildings, college campuses, and bars.

VanDyke is not shy about expressing his impartiality when it comes to gun cases. He suspended his NRA membership so he won’t have to recuse himself in cases pertaining to the gun lobby and even goes as far to write in a private email, ‘We want to be on the record as on the side of gun rights (and the NRA).’

VanDyke is incapable of serving as an impartial justice and his nomination to this extremely important seat should be voted down by all Senators who value the impartiality of our judicial system.”

Ultimately, before President Trump took office in 2017, the Ninth Circuit was composed of 19 Democrat appointees and 6 Republican appointees! Now, Fox News is reporting that after Van Dyke’s confirmation to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, it marked

President Trump’s 50th successful appellate court appointment in just three years in office, and his second to the historically liberal 9th Circuit in as many days.

By contrast, President Barack Obama nominated a total of 55 circuit judges who were confirmed over eight years — and Obama’s nominees were, on average, approximately ten years older. The White House has dramatically transformed the 9th Circuit, a powerful court with jurisdiction over nine states and Guam that has long been a thorn in the president’s side.

Of the 30 active seats on the 9th Circuit, 10 have now been appointed by Trump, and 14 by Republican presidents. Only nine of the court’s 19 semi-retired “senior status” judges were appointed by Democrats, with 10 by Republicans. That’s a major change from early last year, when only six of the active judges on the 9th Circuit were chosen by Republicans.

Ultimately, as President Trump continues to nominate Constitutionalists, rather than political ideologues, the President along with Republicans in the Senate, have helped to saved Constitutional law in America for generations to come!