Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 12, 2024, 6:26 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Question for anyone who can answer.
#1
Question for anyone who can answer.
Bad enough our SCOTUS is about to get more fundy. But I was just watching a story about 45's potential top 3 picks. How does "Law clerk" translate to bench experience? If this is perfectly legal, why would it be? That makes no sense. It would be like letting the nurse do the neurosurgery. 

Most judges have law degrees first off, but start out as court lawyers then have bench experience before they get appointed to the federal chain.
Reply
#2
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
His picks aren't just law clerks, they are practicing judges.

You know you can Google this stuff, right?

Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Reply
#3
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
(July 6, 2018 at 7:09 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: His picks aren't just law clerks, they are practicing judges.

You know you can Google this stuff, right?

Boru

Ok well, you have a point. 

Doesn't help that the story simply left it at "law clerk". 

But outside the story not making their background clear, what is the legal standard for being appointed or getting on a ballot for any bench seat? That is a separate question. I'd hope it would be just like getting a medical licence.
Reply
#4
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
http://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=...&p=2471070
Reply
#5
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
(July 6, 2018 at 7:39 am)Brian37 Wrote:
(July 6, 2018 at 7:09 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: His picks aren't just law clerks, they are practicing judges.

You know you can Google this stuff, right?

Boru

Ok well, you have a point. 

Doesn't help that the story simply left it at "law clerk". 

But outside the story not making their background clear, what is the legal standard for being appointed or getting on a ballot for any bench seat? That is a separate question. I'd hope it would be just like getting a medical licence.

A (very) quick Google search revealed that there are no qualifications whatsoever for being a US Supreme Court justice. None. 

Sleep well.

Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Reply
#6
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
(July 6, 2018 at 8:53 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(July 6, 2018 at 7:39 am)Brian37 Wrote: Ok well, you have a point. 

Doesn't help that the story simply left it at "law clerk". 

But outside the story not making their background clear, what is the legal standard for being appointed or getting on a ballot for any bench seat? That is a separate question. I'd hope it would be just like getting a medical licence.

A (very) quick Google search revealed that there are no qualifications whatsoever for being a US Supreme Court justice. None. 

Sleep well.

Boru

That is stupid. Not even a law degree? So going by your response, 45 could nominate and put on the bench Sean Hannity, or Rush Limbaugh?

That is scary.

(July 6, 2018 at 7:50 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: http://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=...&p=2471070

Yep, no legal requirements. I think the founders made the mistake of not putting in some. But I guess they assumed the advise and consent part would get congress to bring up experience. I find that lack of requirement scary considering whom now has the power to make those nominations and that congress is lopsided to theocratic minds.
Reply
#7
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
(July 6, 2018 at 6:00 am)Brian37 Wrote: Bad enough our SCOTUS is about to get more fundy. But I was just watching a story about 45's potential top 3 picks. How does "Law clerk" translate to bench experience? If this is perfectly legal, why would it be? That makes no sense. It would be like letting the nurse do the neurosurgery. 

Most judges have law degrees first off, but start out as court lawyers then have bench experience before they get appointed to the federal chain.

law clerk or a judicial clerk is an individual—generally an attorney—who provides direct assistance and counsel to a judge in making legal determinations and in writing opinions by researching issues before the court.

So people who've clerked for Supreme Court Justices have experience working on cases at that level.  
Reply
#8
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
(July 6, 2018 at 9:06 am)henryp Wrote:
(July 6, 2018 at 6:00 am)Brian37 Wrote: Bad enough our SCOTUS is about to get more fundy. But I was just watching a story about 45's potential top 3 picks. How does "Law clerk" translate to bench experience? If this is perfectly legal, why would it be? That makes no sense. It would be like letting the nurse do the neurosurgery. 

Most judges have law degrees first off, but start out as court lawyers then have bench experience before they get appointed to the federal chain.

law clerk or a judicial clerk is an individual—generally an attorney—who provides direct assistance and counsel to a judge in making legal determinations and in writing opinions by researching issues before the court.

So people who've clerked for Supreme Court Justices have experience working on cases at that level.  

No sorry, while others have rightfully pointed out that these clerks did have bench experience, simply sitting at a desk acting basically as a secretary for a judge, is not the full experience as litigating in the courtroom with a gavel in front of a jury and prosecutor and defense lawyers.

"Generally an attorney" is the key. That means there are clerks who don't have bench experience. "Paralegal" would be the name for someone who has not been a judge or does not have a law degree, but works in the industry under a lawyer or judge.

But sure, I would hope that anyone serving under a SCOTUS was a former judge somewhere, or at a minimum was a court lawyer who has argued in court, and not just sat at a desk.
Reply
#9
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
(July 6, 2018 at 9:03 am)Brian37 Wrote:
(July 6, 2018 at 8:53 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: A (very) quick Google search revealed that there are no qualifications whatsoever for being a US Supreme Court justice. None. 

Sleep well.

Boru

That is stupid. Not even a law degree? So going by your response, 45 could nominate and put on the bench Sean Hannity, or Rush Limbaugh?

That is scary.

(July 6, 2018 at 7:50 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: http://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=...&p=2471070

The Senate has to advise and consent, and they generally prefer nominees who are highly qualified. I'm not sure if we can count on this particular Senate to be that picky.

Yep, no legal requirements. I think the founders made the mistake of not putting in some. But I guess they assumed the advise and consent part would get congress to bring up experience. I find that lack of requirement scary considering whom now has the power to make those nominations and that congress is lopsided to theocratic minds.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
#10
RE: Question for anyone who can answer.
Scott Pruitt for supreme court. Get on the band wagon now!
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Can Anyone Make Any Sense of These Trump Propaganda Brochures? Prof.Lunaphiles 2 478 April 21, 2020 at 7:13 pm
Last Post: brewer
  [Serious] Can you sew? Can you save a life? Gawdzilla Sama 30 3652 April 5, 2020 at 10:54 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Quarantine questions I just can't answer. Gawdzilla Sama 6 749 April 2, 2020 at 7:00 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Whoops. Anyone Can Make A Mistake Minimalist 4 1022 May 8, 2018 at 7:29 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  IRS tax scam phone call DO NOT ANSWER. Brian37 20 2904 January 30, 2018 at 2:08 pm
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Trump judicial nominee can’t answer basic questions brewer 13 1403 December 16, 2017 at 9:18 am
Last Post: Pat Mustard
  Apparently 'Jesus' Was Not The Answer! Minimalist 9 2315 August 30, 2017 at 12:11 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  And, As Always, the Pentagon's Answer to This "Problem" is Mo' Money! Minimalist 9 2097 July 24, 2017 at 12:54 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  The Answer Seems To Be "Yes," Professor Minimalist 1 998 June 4, 2017 at 1:49 pm
Last Post: The Industrial Atheist



Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)