if it is indeed true that this judge was appointed by Trump (I haven't looked into it), it is reasonable to believe that it probably wasn't based on merit or understanding of law. This is because he has a long history of promoting/installing people that he believes (whether or not it turns out to be the case) will obey him above all else.
> This is because he has a long history of promoting/installing people that he believes (whether or not it turns out to be the case) will obey him above all else.
Is there any evidence of this besides some angry tweets? If this was widely accepted as fact, I don't think the constitutionalists on the right would have supported his re-election, as that doesn't align with separation of powers.
Best evidence would probably the current cabinet picks. Plenty of un and underqualified people are slated for very high positions. Furthermore, the primary thrust of Project 2025 was to install people loyal to trump above all else. The authors of 2025 are on the Trump cabinet.
I can give more details if you like, but I think that's a bit OT from the current discussion for AJ's bankruptcy.
Also, I don't agree with the assessment that Lopez is unqualified or was nefariously picked.
I don't think the trump admin really cared one way or another about a bankruptcy judge.
FWIW, Lopez has the credentials for the job. [1] He was a bankruptcy lawyer and teacher for years before being appointed as a judge.
I say this as someone not a fan of his rulings. I think the "he was a Trump appointee" critiques are misplaced. He's simply isn't good as a judge which, arguably, is a pretty different skillset from being a lawyer.
