The president’s nominees to federal circuit

[RonPurewal]

I made the same mistake of going by structure, assuming BUT will lead to a difference in stance.

that's possible, but the passage has a different contrast: they have been judged on the basis of their stance on certain issues, BUT they should be judged on xxxxxx other basis.

[RonPurewal]

if i give you a real-world analogy, you'll see that this kind of thing isn't unusual.

Tom seems to have become strong by spending so many hours in the gym, BUT...

• ...he's actually not very strong, as we can see from xxxx
(this one is like what you expected to see here)

• ...he actually built his strength by working on a farm
(this one works like the passage)

i doubt you'd have trouble with either of these. you just have to keep an open mind and think about the context.

[KenH482]

Hi Ron,
I'm gonna ask a really silly question but I'm really struggled with it -

How do I deconstruct this sentence into subject, verb and object? It looks to me that it's a run-on sentence with 2 verbs (were & regarded). I have zero knowledge on the legal system in US and have a really hard time in understanding this whole passage. Particularly, I don't understand the 2nd half of the sentence, which looks like a wrong sentence to me. Thank you!

Further, the nominees with industry ties were
overwhelmingly appointed to circuit courts regarded as
traditional battlegrounds over litigation affecting these
industries.