After 00:33 In the CNN video Lawmaker explains what Democrats are planning to do with Trump's tax documents "Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), who sits on the House Ways and Means committee, explains how Democrats are planning to investigate former President Donald Trump's taxes after the Supreme Court cleared the way for their release" mentions
I actually made the first motion to get these tax returns on February 3rd, 2017
and shortly thereafter says:
He never had the law on his side but he had plenty of republicans who would block and obstruct and refuse to take action, and then a Trump-appointed judge sat on the lawsuit for two and a half years. And so now we are right up against the final deadline, and we know the same House republicans that blocked access to his returns -- when we could have gotten them a long, long time ago -- have already begun putting out statements that make it clear if we don't get action before the January 3rd deadline, we will never be able to hold him to any level of accountability, and fulfill our legislative responsibility to see whether the IRS is conducting its audit duties appropriately.
Representative Doggett's sentences are long to begin with, but I included this much of the quote to make Doggett's personal viewpoint(s) clear.
What caught my attention is Doggett's image of "sitting on a lawsuit" by a judge, and the connection with the judge's being appointed by an individual involved in the lawsuit.
So I'd like to ask:
Question: Which Trump-appointed judge allegedly "sat on the lawsuit for two and a half years" related to Trump's tax returns, and did they really sit on it?
To "sit on" something in this particular context likely means to slow it down or fail to take action in an appropriately timely manner consistent with the execution of the alleged sitter's recognized responsibilities and duties. At least that's my take on it.