The American Bar Association should disbar Kavanaugh

[Duppers]

Could he remain on the bench if he were disbarred?

[TomSlick]

1. The American Bar Association does not have the authority to disbar anyone.

Each state licenses lawyers - some by the state supreme court and some by a "unified bar." The American Bar Association is simply a voluntary organization to which some - but not most - lawyers belong.

[Duppers]

5. Thank you.

[SCantiGOP]

2. Yes

Only constitutional requirement to be on the SCOTUS is to be nominated by POTUS and confirmed by Senate. Several over the years have been foreign born.
Technically, a 16 year old high school student could be appointed (don’t tell Trump - Barron could be on the Court for the next 60 years.)

[MaryMagdaline]

3. Your point is well taken

If someone files a bar complaint in his state, the state bar would deal with it. Whether they would find probable cause and make him go to a hearing is something else.

But scanti is right. Bar Association is more like a guild. No power over its members.

[Duppers]

6. Wish Dr. Ford had filed a complaint.

How I wish.

🙏

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. The ABA doesn't disbar anybody. It's a professional organization

in which membership is not mandatory. It accredits law schools but it has no authority over individual law licenses - that's done by agencies in each state. And a judge doesn't need a law license to be a judge because judges don't practice law (represent clients).

[Duppers]

7. Shows how uneducated about this subject I am.

Thanks.

[TomSlick]

8. Well.....

The US Constitution has no qualifications for federal judges but it's unimaginable that a person would be nominated for any federal judgeship without a law license. I haven't performed a review of other states, but Arkansas requires that someone running for a judgeship be a practicing attorney for different number of years for different level courts. The fact judges don't represent clients does not remove the requirement for a law license.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. I stand by that statement. Although some states might require law licenses for judges,

the Supreme Court does not, per the Constitution. Benjamin Cardozo, one of the most respected Justices, did not graduate from law school (though he passed the bar anyhow). In my state, Minnesota, a judge must be eligible to vote, at least age 21, and be "learned in the law," which courts have interpreted as meaning being a licensed attorney. But my great-grandfather was a county judge in Wisconsin for years and he'd never been a lawyer or even gone to law school. He had been a justice of the peace for some years and was eventually elected county judge, and by all accounts he was very well-respected. These days that probably wouldn't happen, of course; but the statement that a Supreme Court justice does not have to be a lawyer or have a law license is true.

[TomSlick]

10. I suppose it is true that federal judges

do not have to be lawyers since the Constitution doesn't say so. Then again, under the same rationale, federal judges need not be adults or even human.

In your great-grandfather's day, many lawyers did not attend law school. They generally "read the law" under the supervision of an attorney - often little more than an apprenticeship. However, they were admitted to the bar at least by a local judge after demonstrating they were "learned in the law." "Reading the law" was the usual form of legal education for American lawyers until early 1900s. The last Supreme Court justice who did not attend a formal law school was James Byrnes who served from June 1941 to October 1942.

My assumption is that Arkansas is not leading the country in this area. My bet would be that if Arkansas requires judges to have a law license and some years of practice, most (if not all) states do. However, some caution is required. A "county judge" in Arkansas is not a judge at all - s/he is the chief executive of the county. Similarly, the justices of the peace have no judicial function, they are the county's legislature.