Comments on: Supreme Court Justice Experience

By: floyd

floyd — Sat, 09 May 2009 01:23:20 +0000

Who ever gets the job , you can bet it will be someone who sees the constitution as a peripheral document, as opposed to ultimately the only document of reference, when considering an opinion.

By: Jay C.

Jay C. — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:17:14 +0000

Orin Kerr's tongue in cheek is very pointed, but I think I would want to see a brilliant lawyer with no prior judging experience. I was one of a few people who had no problems with Harriet Miers, and by that same standard I don't think I'll cry foul over Kagan.

But if I had my way I'd want it to be Janice Rodgers Brown, FTW.

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Fri, 08 May 2009 17:39:15 +0000

She should then go to law school. After law school, she should clerk for a magistrate judge, a bankruptcy judge, a district court judge, a court of appeals judge, and a Supreme Court Justice. That way, the nominee will have a good sense of what it’s like at all stages of the federal court system.

How about subjecting them to a wrong door raid too? No really.

By: Raoul

Raoul — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:15:55 +0000

I wonder where all these useful suggestions were when Bush was president.

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Fri, 08 May 2009 14:23:59 +0000

I think it would be nice to have at least a few members of the SCOTUS with experience as a trial court judge. Souter IIRC was perhaps the only one of them that did, and whether or not he was a mediocore justice (certainly no Stevens), I think the point stands.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Fri, 08 May 2009 14:17:04 +0000

No, I agree. I take Kerr's point that any given nominee will necessarily be deficient in any number of areas. But it might be worth ameliorating that by diversifying the backgrounds of the nominees.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Fri, 08 May 2009 14:15:07 +0000

Regardless of the experience and practice of the last 30 years to the contrary and the chortling from various and sundry parties there is no actual constitutional requirement that prospective Supreme Court justices have been a former editor of the Harvard or Yale Law Review. Nor is there a requirement that the prospective justice have been a judge in the Federal Court of Appeals nor even have experience as a judge at all. The prospective justice need not have practiced law although I think we can safely say that having passed the bar would be nice.

I believe that it's perfectly legitimate for us and even the Obama Administration to reflect on what sort of justice serves the country best. It might be that a Harvard or Yale Law grad who's clerked for a Supreme Court justice and served in the U. S. Court of Appeals is the right choice. I don't think it's the only choice.