Started By
Message

re: John Kennedy grills trump federal judge nominee

Posted on 12/15/17 at 5:52 pm to
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
59466 posts
Posted on 12/15/17 at 5:52 pm to
quote:

Solicitor General and District Court judge are two different worlds. Arguably Petersen would be far more qualified to be SG.


You might be confused as to what the solicitor general does. It is he person tasked with representing the US in front of the Supreme Court. Having someone who has never argued in any court is more qualified to do that than be a district judge? I'll bite. Make the argument.
Posted by Obtuse1
Westside Bodymore Yo
Member since Sep 2016
30499 posts
Posted on 12/15/17 at 5:58 pm to
quote:

Can you imagine the look on the hypothetical law clerk’s face when the Article III judge asks him/her “what exactly is a motion in limine?”


Even better when he pronounces it with two syllables rather than 3.

I am sure there are several other attorneys in this thread and I am sure we have all been in court rooms with judges just like this, Federal, State and Local.

I will say this though, I do think a judge can be very good and become great without ever trying a case. Just like a referee can be very good at his job without ever playing the sport. That said those individuals are extremely rare and this guy does not seem to be one of them no matter how strong his CV is otherwise.

ETA I don't like Kennedy ever since he said my dog was getting undeserved handouts... he really did Mudflap gets called out for being a poor Every time I show her the commercial she give me the "he can GF himself" look. Then I remind her how she was up in Petsmart making it rain all that actor money she got and she seems fine with it.
This post was edited on 12/15/17 at 6:05 pm
Posted by Folsom
Folsom
Member since Mar 2006
3633 posts
Posted on 12/15/17 at 6:06 pm to
quote:

It's insane that someone with so little real world experience in actual legal practice would be put up for the bench. Never tried a jury or bench trial, or even so much as argued a motion in any court (basically he's never SET FOOT in a courtroom as a lawyer). Never taken a deposition by himself, and only been involved in about 5 total.




I wonder who on the President's staff recommended him?
Posted by theronswanson
House built with my hands
Member since Feb 2012
3257 posts
Posted on 12/15/17 at 6:49 pm to
quote:

You might be confused as to what the solicitor general does. It is he person tasked with representing the US in front of the Supreme Court. Having someone who has never argued in any court is more qualified to do that than be a district judge? I'll bite. Make the argument


No confusion. The SG's office performs a role more akin to moot court in law school. The issues are narrow, though widely significant, by the time they have reached the Supreme Court. The supreme court doesn't deal with MILs so I do not really hold that against him. He is no doubt very smart and performing that role is much simpler. He can learn the issues and effectively argue in front of the court.

However, a district court judge operates much differently. MILs, Daubert motions, nuanced trial procedure, discovery motions, etc are all things that lawyers spend years understanding and learning. Its a craft. Someone going to the bench on day one not knowing what those are can really make very poor decisions that can have a cascading effect throughout the docket. Moreover, he will be handing out sentences and handling high profile issues. The public and the bar needs to know that someone qualified, even if you disagree with them, is making those decisions.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram