The idea of a non-lawyer on the Supreme Court is IMHO a charming anachronism. The bulk of the cases the Court decides each term are those you never read about, because they are not newsworthy. These are patent and trademark cases, tax cases, ERISA cases, water rights disputes, administrative law cases, etc. What these have in common is that they are highly technical to the point where many lawyers have trouble dealing with them, and a non-lawyer would be totally lost. Cases like Roe v. Wade or Bush v. Gore, which is what people think about when they think "Supreme Court," are the exception, not the rule.
posted on 10/07/2005 11:17:10 AM PDT
(Labs for love; .357 for Security.)
I think you misunderestimate the talents of many brilliant individuals available. I've worked on some cases that lawyers had trouble understanding but I didn't.
posted on 10/07/2005 11:19:01 AM PDT
(Corporatism is not conservatism)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson