Where's the passion in the opposition to Roberts?
althouse at wisc.edu
Mon Jul 25 04:58:58 PDT 2005
I wonder why long term service on the Court of Appeals, especially
the D.C. Circuit, is considered such a useful background, especially
when it replicates the experience of others already on the Court.
Shouldn't we want some more diversity and some more connection with
the real world? It seems to me once people are federal judges, they
have limited experience with the lives of ordinary people and limited
feedback about their own shortcomings.
On Jul 25, 2005, at 5:20 AM, Earl Maltz wrote:
> "barely qualified or unqualified?" All Clarence Thomas did, prior
> to his brief service on the United States Court of Appeals for the
> District of Columbia, was to head an agency charged with
> administering a major federal statute for nine years. For much of
> the twentieth century, such experience was considered excellent
> preparation for service on the Court. The case for Janice Rogers
> Brown on the experience issue is even clearer; she served for a
> decade on the most important state supreme court in the country.
> One could plausibly oppose both Thomas and Rogers Brown because
> their views might be seen as extreme. But unqualified? Please.
> At 09:52 PM 7/24/2005 -0700, Janet Alexander wrote:
>> Many previous Republican nominees to the Supreme Court and the
>> Courts of Appeals and many of the rumored candidates for the
>> O'Connor vacancy have been barely qualified or unqualified (this
>> includes the sainted O'Connor, who at the time of her appointment
>> was a little-known judge on an intermediate state appellate court,
>> as well as Clarence Thomas, Janice Rogers Brown, etc.), .
>> Janet Alexander
>> At 05:53 PM 7/24/2005 -0400, Earl Maltz wrote:
>>> I didn't know very much about John Roberts except by reputation
>>> until he was nominated by the Court. However, even I knew that
>>> he was a committed conservative whose commitm
>>> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be
>>> viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read
>>> messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and
>>> list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to
>> Janet Cooper Alexander
>> Frederick I. Richman Professor of Law
>> Stanford Law School
>> Stanford CA 94301-8610
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed
> as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages
> that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members
> can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
More information about the Conlawprof