CountVolcula
Eternal Vol
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
- Messages
- 32,490
- Likes
- 19,827
The following comment has nothing to do with politics and nothing to do with Kagan:
A person going to sit on a state appellate panel definitely needs trial lawyer or trial judge experience. This is because the vast majority of issues raised on appeal to state appellate courts are claims that a trial judge ruled incorrectly in the midst of one.
At the federal level, this is less important because the standard of reviewing similar in-trial decisions by federal judges is so much higher, meaning that they are rarely second guessed by federal appellate judges.
And that is even more so the case with the Supreme Court. A tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of their cases have anything to do with claims of error at trial. It is almost all interpreting federal statutes, international agreements, and the Constitution.
The value to having been a trial lawyer or having been a judge is really not nearly as high for SCOTUS as it is for everyother level.
Having said that, I do wish that somewhere down the line we'd get some folks up there with day-to-day law office and practice management experience. You see things a whole lot different when you have to juggle your client's interests and getting constantly attacked and criticized by judges and opposing lawyers.
The system is way broken right now. How the interpretations of the law interrelate to that depends on the subject. Just saying that the folks we see getting put up there lately do not have an appreciation for that, except in theory, and that's just not the same.
Well said! I totally agree