In the foreground of the current legal fray around former president Donald Trump’s third indictment, relates to his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. As the situation intensifies, notable Republicans, including Senator Lindsey Graham, are voicing their sentiments publicly. Graham, in particular, has chosen to criticise Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the January 6th case. He is making rounds on cable news channels, insisting that Judge Chutkan, an ex-defense attorney and a former supervisor at the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia, is biased against Trump.
Graham has been quoted as stating, “The judge in this case hates Trump,” and suggesting that under her jurisdiction, Trump could be convicted for even past crimes such one as infamous as kidnapping “Lindbergh’s baby in D.C.” Graham’s assertions all seemingly stem from his vocal push for a change of venue for the case, calling for a need for a new judge and even extending his comments to the political sphere – endorsing a Republican victory in 2024 to, in his words, “stop this crazy crap.”
Interestingly, this stance from Graham is a stark contrast from his position in 2014 when he voted in favor of Chutkan’s appointment to the D.C. court. Despite the presence of strong evidence of alleged bias, Graham is not the only senator to switch sides regarding Judge Chutkan now that she is in charge of the case involving Trump. A similar change of heart has also been reported from Senator Ted Cruz, who despite earlier confirmation votes for Chutkan, now criticises her.
There are, however, no issues seen among these senators with Judge Aileen Cannon presiding over the Trump documents case. Judge Cannon, who previously received significant criticism from the Eleventh Circuit for presumptively lopsided and pro-Trump rulings in the Trump warrant case, seemingly poses no concern for them. In effect, the question arises whether they only raise issues of bias when it does not favor their objectives.