Actually I am all for appointing some non-attorneys to SCOTUS.
That institution must be broken out of its groupthink bubble.
I agree.
#1 job of SCOTUS is to understand and follow the Constitution. So who can do that the best?
I’d like to see a Walter Williams/Sowell/Napolitano type.
I think you have to stick with someone who has a firm grasp of the judicial system. That means the person should have been a judge and have a sterling track record.
We need to know their views on the Constitution, and that they have judged in accordance with it.
I understand your thinking, but I think you’re off base a bit.
That institution must be broken out of its groupthink bubble.
I think Justice Scalia rejected that idea. His point was that laymen such as you and I think of SCOTUS justices as either philosopher king wannabes, or not philosopher king wannabes. But on a daily, hourly basis, the job is legal work, for which legal training is essential for effectiveness.Maybe you could name an autodidact who would learn anything and do any job well. Thomas Sowell, for example. But it would be a problem until he got up to speed (and Sowell himself is in his late eighties).
That was my first thought, too.
However, it turns out Thiel graduated from Stanford Law School and clerked for Judge James Edmondson of the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Judge Edmondson is a Reagan appointee.