Trump judge nominee, 36, who has never tried a case, wins approval of Senate panel

[AUDub 11,147]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-judge-20171110-story.html

Aw, hell. I know this guy personally. All of my interactions with him have been friendly, in spite if the fact that he's A. ultraconservative and B. a huge bammer. 

I've let him know what I think.

Brett J. Talley, President Trump’s nominee to be a federal judge in Alabama, has never tried a case, was unanimously rated “not qualified” by the American Bar Assn.’s judicial rating committee, has practiced law for only three years and, as a blogger last year, displayed a degree of partisanship unusual for a judicial nominee, denouncing “Hillary Rotten Clinton” and pledging support for the National Rifle Assn.

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee, on a party-line vote, approved him for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.

[TexasTiger 12,828]

Dumbing the swamp.

[AUDub 11,147]

Brett is actually pretty smart. Top of his class at Bama and top of his class at Harvard Law, a good editorial position in Harvard law review, some really solid clerking, his work under Senator Portman and whatnot are the beginnings of a fine career. So let's not take that away from him because it is impressive. 

But he is not qualified. His nomination isn ridiculous on its face. He needs to withdraw. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

Yeah, that's really bad.  No way in hell he should be on a bench right now with that little experience.

[TexasTiger 12,828]

On 11/11/2017 at 2:07 PM, Bigbens42 said:

Brett is actually pretty smart. Top of his class at Bama and top of his class at Harvard Law, a good editorial position in Harvard law review, some really solid clerking, his work under Senator Portman and whatnot are the beginnings of a fine career. So let's not take that away from him because it is impressive. 

But he is not qualified. His nomination isn ridiculous on its face. He needs to withdraw. 

By dumbing down I mean appointing unqualified folks. Many unqualified folks may be intelligent. I guess Ben Carson must be even though I've never seen him demonstrate it. But he's totally unqualified for HUD.

[AUDub 11,147]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

By dumbing down I mean appointing unqualified folks. Many unqualified folks may be intelligent. I guess Ben Carson must be even though I've never seen him demonstrate it. But he's totally unqualified for HUD.

From what I know, he is a brilliant neurosurgeon. If I needed someone to cut into my brain, his name would be one of the first to pop into my head. 

But that doesn't mean I would ask for his opinion on anything else. Guy thought the pyramids were for storing grain, of all things. 

[TexasTiger 12,828]

48 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

From what I know, he is a brilliant neurosurgeon. If I needed someone to cut into my brain, his name would be one of the first to pop into my head. 

But that doesn't mean I would ask for his opinion on anything else. Guy thought the pyramids were for storing grain, of all things. 

I know he has a successful track record, but if I had an appointment with him, I suspect I'd cross him of my surgeon list assuming something must have happened since that reputation was earned.

[aujeff11 6,243]

https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/a-trump-judicial-nominee-is-under-investigation-for-not-telling-anybody-he-comments-on-an-alabama-football-message-board-as-bamainboston/?_referrer=twitter&_branch_match_id=459414545503512863

Frickin hilarious.

 

[AUDub 11,147]

6 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/a-trump-judicial-nominee-is-under-investigation-for-not-telling-anybody-he-comments-on-an-alabama-football-message-board-as-bamainboston/?_referrer=twitter&_branch_match_id=459414545503512863

Frickin hilarious.

 

Somebody at Buzzfeed knows how to Google. Any that venture over there, dub is me.

[aujeff11 6,243]

23 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Somebody at Buzzfeed knows how to Google. Any that venture over there, dub is me.

I don’t know what you’re saying or why Buzzfeed is relevant but alright then. Hi Dub.

Nevermind. I see BFnews now.

[AUDub 11,147]

7 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I don’t know what you’re saying or why Buzzfeed is relevant but alright then. Hi Dub.

They're sourcing Buzzfeed, hence the bolded portion below.

Quote

BFNews - One of President Donald Trump’s federal court nominees appears to have written posts for years on a University of Alabama sports fan website — including posts about gun control and immigration — and didn’t disclose the writings on his Senate questionnaire.

Oh, and I am an active poster there (tidefans), mostly in the non-sports area.

[homersapien 11,361]

The alt right isn't going to like his comments on immigration. 

[AUDub 11,147]

 

[AUDub 11,147]

Dang. 

Brett would have been able to answer those questions, but Senator Kennedy was referencing him with those last two questions. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

7 hours ago, Bigbens42 said:

Dang. 

Brett would have been able to answer those questions, but Senator Kennedy was referencing him with those last two questions. 

Oh that's fricking awful.  People seriously need to watch this and realize that POTUS is nominating vastly underqualified candidates to the bench, and for what reason I'll never understand.

[HVAU 673]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

Oh that's fricking awful.  People seriously need to watch this and realize that POTUS is nominating vastly underqualified candidates to the bench, and for what reason I'll never understand.

It is mind boggling.  I assume there are plenty of qualified legal representatives that align with conservative philosophies.  To pick candidates such as these indicates a lack of either ethics, competence and/or concern.  

 

[AUDub 11,147]

 

 

[Barnacle 9,064]

9 hours ago, Bigbens42 said:

Dang. 

Brett would have been able to answer those questions, but Senator Kennedy was referencing him with those last two questions. 

A first year law student would have fared better.

[Barnacle 9,064]

46 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

 

 

He shouldn't be nominated due to the lack of experience alone, but this is right. Those weren't difficult questions to answer. 

[AUDub 11,147]

A good read from Popehat. 

https://www.popehat.com/2017/12/15/i-have-almost-nothing-bad-to-say-about-matthew-spencer-petersen/

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

9 hours ago, HVAU said:

It is mind boggling.  I assume there are plenty of qualified legal representatives that align with conservative philosophies.  To pick candidates such as these indicates a lack of either ethics, competence and/or concern.  

 

 

On 11/10/2017 at 9:23 PM, TexasTiger said:

Dumbing the swamp.

Bother Bill Clinton nominated Elena Kagan, who had also never tried a case, in 1999 - but she was not confirmed. This is not a uniquely conservative move. I'm not even sure if SCOTUS Justice Breyer, appointed by Bill Clinton, ever tried a case either. Could be wrong on that last one. @Bigbens42 if you know otherwise on Breyer chime in. 

[AUDub 11,147]

13 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Bother Bill Clinton nominated Elena Kagan, who had also never tried a case, in 1999 - but she was not confirmed. This is not a uniquely conservative move. I'm not even sure if SCOTUS Justice Breyer, appointed by Bill Clinton, ever tried a case either. Could be wrong on that last one. @Bigbens42 if you know otherwise on Breyer chime in. 

Appellate courts are a bit different. Brett was nominated to be a trial judge, which requires a different set of skills, and having no experience on the bench there is a big time disqualifier. 

Plenty of academics, like Kagan, have been appointed to the SCOTUS who had little or no experience. However, those individuals had records which could be examined and their intellects weighed. Three years of closing loans, writing a political blog and clerking aren't really heavy enough for a federal judge. A clerk does legal research and tailors it to the judge he clerks for. .

One of the most important abilities a trial judge must have is an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules of evidence and the ability to apply them correctly and instantly in the course of a trial. You don't learn that clerking, writing blogs or closing loans. The ABA was absolutely correct. He is unqualified. The ABA doesn't lightly DQ someone.

Breyer had experience on an appellate court before his nomination.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

3 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Appellate courts are a bit different. Brett was nominated to be a trial judge, which requires a different set of skills, and having no experience on the bench there is a big time disqualifier. 

Plenty of academics, like Kagan, have been appointed to the SCOTUS who had little or no experience. However, those individuals had records which could be examined and their intellects weighed. Three years of closing loans, writing a political blog and clerking aren't really heavy enough for a federal judge. A clerk does legal research and tailors it to the judge he clerks for. .

One of the most important abilities a trial judge must have is an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules of evidence and the ability to apply them correctly and instantly in the course of a trial. You don't learn that clerking, writing blogs or closing loans. The ABA was absolutely correct. He is unqualified. The ABA doesn't lightly DQ someone.

The main thrust, at least that I have seen online and judging by titles, is the mere fact that the guy doesn't have experience trying an actual case - which isn't really a big issue standing alone on its on. Sure, it's rare, but i think the facts that you shared, many people are unaware of. It would be nice to read some of his work, including law review journals if he contributed/has contributed further

[AUDub 11,147]

17 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

The main thrust, at least that I have seen online and judging by titles, is the mere fact that the guy doesn't have experience trying an actual case - which isn't really a big issue standing alone on its on.

It is a pretty big deal. I still wouldn't have been happy with putting him on an appellate court, but I do believe he would have been better qualified there. No trial experience isn't an automatic disqualifier, though I would prefer longer than 3 years in law practice, as would the ABA, who recommends 12.

A trial judge, though? Laughable. A dearth of experience can and should get you struck from the list every time.

[DKW 86 7,419]

If that is a Harvard Law Grad, we need to close the place down. 

<smgdh>