She's young, healthy, and not guilty. She'll likely be on the bench for at least 40 years.
“Doesn’t anyone think we’re, forgive me, “rushing” this?”
No. Good enough for President Trump and Judge Gorsuch, good enough for me. Next question.
We have 100 district court judges we could appoint in one day. But dilly dally!!
Joe Patrice joined Above the Law in 2013. Joe received a degree in Economics and Political Science from the University of Oregon and a J.D. from the NYU School of Law. From 2001, he worked as a litigator for both Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton and Lankler Siffert & Wohl, representing a variety of individuals, institutions, and foreign sovereigns in criminal and civil matters. Joe left legal practice in 2012 to pursue writing, contributing to numerous publications, including ATL, before joining the full-time staff. "
Worked as a litigator for 11+ years and never made partner? Some might suggest the writer couldn't hack it as a real attorney so he writes bitter, libtard news on a web blog?
ATL was once an interesting and informative site. But they have gone all in on TDS and are now unreadable.
Worst case for the midterms, we keep seeing Trump nominate conservative judges. I’ll take that !!!
I have socks older than this.
Is seven years enough time? I’d think a person like this had better be very special.
I guess she’s not a member of ‘the club’, right, Mr. Patrice?
Don’t you just hate it when the smarter ones get picked for the better jobs? I’m sure there were many more dumber ones with more experiences...
“Do you detect jealousy?”
Oh, hell, yeah. I’m beginning to think Trump’s enemies have less to do with ideology, and more to do with raw, unbridled jealousy. That includes McCain, Ryan, and other hateful libs.
This writer is seriously unprofessional and childish.
The lesser courts are different, I understand, but being an attorney is not even required to sit on the USSC.
She's young, healthy, and not guilty. She'll likely be on the bench for at least 40 years.
Today's challenge: Name one appellate judge that Obama appointed who is anything less than a rabidly pro-abortion, anti-second amendment, ideological liberal.
Yet their side nominated and elected a president with less legal experience.
A known solid conservative whom I will guess is about 36. Get her into a starter judgeship now and in less than a decade, if she continues to do well, she will be a prime candidate as a USSC nominee.
The simple fact is that such nominees are now widely considered to be viable only from their late 40s to early 50s, which makes many of them simply miss the “correct” age window because the Dems are in power or there is no opening. This is a bigger issue for the GOP than the Dems, because so many lawyers lean to the left, and especially for actually conservative, top GOP attorneys, who aren’t that plentiful.
Far better that we think flexibly enough to give our best candidates a wider window of viability so they can more likely make it to be a nominee. Already she has great experience in her clerkships and in the practice of law.
If Americans are eligible to be voted in as president at age 35, I think a top, experienced candidate above that age threshold is fine as a circuit judge.
He prefers judges that rule on their emotional connection with the case, no experience required. Beyond the emotional quotient, he would like to have a judge who relies on foreign law and Non-christian religions practices, and finally, a decision based on popular progressive fads.
He will likely to be disappointed with this nominee.
Fancy that, a liberal writer making a comment that makes my day.
The author leaves out the elephant in the room - judges serve for life. Trump is remaking the judiciary and his efforts will last for many many years.