Poiuyt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:01 PM
Original message |
Has there ever been a Supreme Court Justice who hadn't been a judge before |
|
Talk about starting at the top!
|
LisaM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Well, Rehnquist for one |
|
apparently there have been 19.
|
Zuni
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message |
jobycom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message |
Marnieworld
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Has there ever been a nominee chosen from a POTUS admin. ? |
|
No bench experience and straighat out of the policy arm of the White HOuse. It's a joke.
|
FSogol
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. Kennedy picked Byron White who was the Asst. AG and not a judge. nt |
tx_dem41
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. Off the top of my head, William O. Douglas by FDR... |
|
and Rehnquist by Nixon. I'm certain there are a few others.
|
incapsulated
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Other than making your brother Attorney General, a Democratic trick, this takes the cake. Why not nominate Rove for fucks sake? What does it matter anymore.
|
tx_dem41
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:03 PM
Response to Original message |
5. On NPR, they stated 37. Which makes it a significant number. n/t |
Kenroy
(768 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:05 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Many of them, including Earl Warren and William Rehnquist.
|
Hepburn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:07 PM
Response to Original message |
|
..actually a lot of them were not sitting judges prior to appointment. But, they did have some kind of experience. Miers is even light on her appellate work as an atty.
|
John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. Not just an attorney, a (gasp) trail lawyer! sarcasm off |
northzax
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:09 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Taft, Marshall, among others |
|
and roberts was a judge for what, 18 months? it's not that big of a deal.
|
CBGLuthier
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:19 PM
Response to Original message |
13. a judge and a justices jobs are very different |
|
A judges duty, usually, is to ensure fair trials and act as a sort of referee.
The justices at the SC level primarily deal with strictly constitutional issues about cases that have usually been tried or in some cases denied being tried as in civil lawsuits that are denied.
I don't personally see where being a judge would be an automatic qualifier for being a SC justice.
|
Journeyman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. Thank you, notmypresident. . . |
|
In all the bandying about with this issue, your's is the first post to deal head-on with the issue of qualifications. And you're so very right: this is not a judge who's being seated, it's a Supreme Court justice, an entirely different position.
To your conclusion I'd add that even a degree in law isn't necessary for being a justice. A proven history of well-reasoned thought, judicious discernment, and proven capacity for expression -- no matter what field of endeavor the candidate has chosen -- would prove far more valuable than simple knowledge of the minutiae of law.
|
NaturalHigh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 06:12 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 01st 2024, 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |