I prefer Supreme Court nominees who answer questions about the law,

[TNNurse]

rather than rambling about hypotheticals.

[dem4decades]

1. She wouldn't answer a question about peaceful transfer of power, they should have asked her

If a murder was against the law.

[TNNurse]

2. Exactly

[FBaggins]

3. How would you know?

What nominee has even hinted at how they would rule on a case in your lifetime?

[The_Counsel]

4. The Thing Is No One is Asking for a Ruling...

...or even a hint. They’re just asking because they want to know if the candidate—a JUDGE who ought to know, mind you—knows the law.

You should not have to read briefs to know the law, you just know the law. The law is the law, period.

So if one asks if it’s illegal to intimidate voters according to the law, there should only be one answer.

Two of you count “I don’t know” as an option...

[misanthrope]

5. Exactly

As a former professor of law, she should be able to do that standing on her head. And she damn well knows the difference.