2021-01-13 03:39:58 UTC
Casting aside the painfully obvious fact that the Republicans are MASSIVE
hypocrites for rushing through the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the
Supreme Court, there is one other aspect of her nomination that I dont feel
is getting enough attention: Her lack of judicial experience.
Barrett spent two years as a judicial clerk from 1997-99 after graduating
from Notre Dame (JD), most notably clerking for Antonin Scalia during his
time on the U.S. Supreme Court. Until her appointment to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in 2017, Barrett spent her time as a private
attorney or as a law professor.
In truth, most of her time has been spent as professor at Notre Dame, where
she taught from 2002 until her appointment to the Seventh Circuit in 2017.
The closest Barrett came to being a judge during her time at Notre Dame was
when Chief Justice Roberts appointed her to serve on the Advisory Committee
for the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. But that isnt the same thing
as being a judge.
From my vantage point at least, having just three years of experience as a
judge isnt very long for a Supreme Court nominee. Being a judicial clerk
isnt nothing, especially when you are clerking for a Supreme Court judge,
but even in then, thats not the same thing as being a judge. Youre more in
an advisory type of role, similar to the role Roberts appointed her to.