« Media objectivity alert | Main | What now? »
October 26, 2005
An actual judge's perspective on Harriet Miers
Earlier this month I wrote about the difficulty inherent in nominating to the Supreme Court someone whose qualifications are in the form of "practical" experience. Yesterday a federal trial judge offered his views on what "qualified" means, and thus a minority view on Harriet Miers:
the role of the litigating attorney, where it is performed as it should be, is of a very high order and is entitled to the greatest respect. There is no reason in the world why such an attorney is not qualified to step into any court, including the Supreme Court. Indeed, why wouldn't the Supreme Court benefit from this? Or from having on it any lawyer who has had a successful career of counseling on complex matters.
I wonder, though, where Miers' eight trials put her in terms of litigation experience as compared to the attorneys in Griesa's courtroom.
Posted by bill at October 26, 2005 04:42 PM
