« leaving NRA convention | Main | Chicago's handgun ban not very successful »
Banging head against wall
From Elena Kagan's questionaire:
"d. List, by case name, all cases in courts of record, including cases before
administrative law judges, you tried to verdict, judgment, or final decision (rather
than settled),....
i. What percentage of these trials were:
1. jury;
2. non-jury.
I have never tried a case to verdict or judgment."
This is a person who has been a tenured law prof for decades, head of Harvard Law School, and now is up for the US Supreme Court. NEVER TRIED A CASE!!!! Not once. Not small claims, not a DUI, nothing.
UPDATE: settling a case isn't trying it. If there was no trial, no one tried the case. In my first year in practice, I tried, oh, 2-3 cases, maybe more, tho my first jury trial had to wait another year or so. In other positions (prosecutor or PD), they might try several misdemeanors a week or felonies a month, but in the civil area trials are fewer. I just find it staggering that a person can be head of Harvard LS and a Supreme Court nominee without every trying anything. It's as if a person became professor of surgery and head of a med school and then Surgeon General without ever having sutured a cut or picked up a scalpel.
15 Comments | Leave a comment
Really? No. Just no. She has tried cases before. Read the actual questionnaire next time. What that questions answer means is that in all the cases that she has tried, the sides decided to settle rather than go all the way through the court system. Considering the fact that she has no say in whether a case is settled or not since it is up to the clients, this answer means nothing other than she followed her clients wishes.
Can you say:
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
We have an AA president. We have one AA judge. These people have devolved to the lowest order.
Since 1975, US colleges and unversities have succumbed to the freaking BS of affirmative action. Students have not been subject to the rigors of a real education.
Why, oh why do you continue to sit behind the facade thinking someone who makes judgments need experience? The Bible tells us never to expect justice on Earth so what better way than to face someone who has no wisdom, no experience.
Look at the man BO himself. My dog is smarting that he.
People who believe Harvard or any of the other Ivy League schools provide a better education are fools.
Tiocafaidh ar la!
Even more scary, she is currently Solicitor General, responsible for arguing the gov'ts position before the SCOTUS.
Prior to that position, she'd never tried a case.
Ever.
She's an academic. It's like sending in a sportswriter to quarterback at the Superbowl.
THAT is insane.
Moreover, check into her performance before the SCOTUS; she's not gotten exactly glowing reviews, especially from her now likely colleagues.
Even though most cases do settle, it's unavoidable that you'll have to go to trial. I was already going to trial within a couple of months of starting practice. And administrative hearings, those go through to final disposition all the time. It's really hard to practice law and not get this sort of experience.
For my edification, did B. Obama ever try a case? Did he fill out a form like Kagan's?
Hey, if Obama wants to nominate an incompetent justice to the Supreme Court, to replace Stevens who I think most people would argue is a sharp Justice, and was a leader for the left-leaning coalition on the Court, I say let him have a go.
After graduation from law school, and admission to the Calif bar, I had tried a muni court case to jury verdict within 8 months.
Is she a member of the bar anywhere??
A do nothing Supreme Court Judge, appointed by a do nothing President. Why not? Did the man vote on anything, ever?
Posted by: FWB at May 19, 2010 09:03 AM:
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
We have an AA president. We have one AA judge. These people have devolved to the lowest order.
The Bible tells us never to expect justice on Earth so what better way than to face someone who has no wisdom, no experience.
Um ... WTF are you talking about?
OMFG,
Sorry, Carl. Too far over your head.
Affirmative Action made sure that unqualified, ignorant people were "given" diplomas for performing subpar. This has been standard practice for 35 years. Certain persons are unable to compete in the highest order playing field and so the standards are lowered until those people can "graduate". Without AA, these folks do not have the capacity to compete.
The Bible states explicitly that justice will never be found on Earth. Ignorant persons are unable to judge and those AA babies who obtained college "degrees" are ignorant.
Of course, those who are anointed need accomplish nothing for they are THE CHOSEN.
I'd tried four cases to a jury before I'd even graduated law school! If she wanted to have court experience, there are MANY opportunities to do so.
That said, many good lawyers never try a case; their practice does not require it. The young lady first in my class was brilliant, but she'll never see the inside of a courtroom.
Of course, those are the same sorts of lawyers who should never be judges. Or justices on the SCOTUS.
Amazing how the liberals are zipping through blog sites defending this nominee.
No, Jim, what is amazing is how incompetently they are attempting the "defense".
The Stepford Candidate.