Discussion:
Amy Barrett Has No Experience - Just Another Incompetent TrumpStooge - PACK THE COURT
Add Reply
Gavin
2021-01-13 03:39:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
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 don’t 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 isn’t the same thing
as being a judge.

From my vantage point at least, having just three years of experience as a
judge isn’t very long for a Supreme Court nominee. Being a judicial clerk
isn’t nothing, especially when you are clerking for a Supreme Court judge,
but even in then, that’s not the same thing as being a judge. You’re more in
an advisory type of role, similar to the role Roberts appointed her to.
Rudy Canoza
2021-01-13 04:04:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gavin
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 don’t feel
is getting enough attention: Her lack of judicial experience.
I'm not a fan of Brett "Rapist" Kavanaugh in any way, but he wrote dozens upon
dozens of appellate decisions that were unanimous in his circuit, and dozens
more in which someone concurred or dissented. Like him or not, he had a lot of
appellate court experience.

Barrett submitted a mere *11* cases to the Senate judiciary committee for
consideration. She is absolutely a lightweight, and she was selected *only* for
her fidelity to far-right judicial doctrine, *not* because she's a great jurist.

I'd still bone her. She's what I call a handsome woman, rather than a hottie.
Hotties still catch my eye, and I'd bone them, too, but at my age (70+), I
prefer handsome women to hotties. Any thinking man does when he gets older.
Post by Gavin
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 isn’t the same thing
as being a judge.
From my vantage point at least, having just three years of experience as a
judge isn’t very long for a Supreme Court nominee. Being a judicial clerk
isn’t nothing, especially when you are clerking for a Supreme Court judge,
but even in then, that’s not the same thing as being a judge. You’re more in
an advisory type of role, similar to the role Roberts appointed her to.
Loading...