Speechless. Jaw on the floor. Literally watched it with my mouth hanging open. Never tried a case to verdict. Never argued a motion in state or federal court. Never even took a fucking deposition. Hadn’t read the rules of civil procedure since law school. Couldn’t even tell him what a goddamn motion in limine was.
The Younger and Pullman Abstention questions, yeah, those were a bit advanced. Compared to, say, “have you ever argued a motion in state court?” or “what’s a motion in limine.” But they ought to be, at most, of the “okay, I need to take a quick peek at Wikipedia to refresh my recollection about which is which” variety of advanced for anyone appointed to a federal judgeship and the person in question better have a bunch of other relevant experience. (Ideally, of course, the answer would be, “yes, Senator, I have briefed and argued cases involving Younger abstention, Pullman abstention, Burford, Thibideaux, Colorado River, Rooker Feldman, Political Question Doctrine, all that shit Senator.”)
And there’s a level of arrogant naivete on the part of this dimwit to even think he was in the ballpark of being qualified for this appointment. There’s a level of outright stupidity for all involved to be treating a federal judgeship as if this is pre-Pendelton Act America and he’s being appointed deputy postmaster of Bumfuck, Idaho.
I have worked with people who’ve gone through the initial screening process for a federal judicial nomination–just the paperwork, the incredibly detailed questionnaire, the financial disclosures and questions intended to flush out whether there’s anything in your past that will embarrass the administration during confirmation proceedings. One guy I know said it was like subjecting your entire personal and professional career to a colo-rectal exam without anesthesia. And that was back under Bush with a friendly Senate.
I know distinguished, politically well connected rial lawyers who didn’t make the grade because they didn’t have criminal law experience (though people with criminal experience but little or no civil didn’t similarly get blackballed) or because they had too long a paper trail of scholarly articles or news clippings.
Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people who started the initial vetting process and decided it wasn’t worth it or that, having seen the kind of stuff they’re being asked, in all honesty, felt they weren’t qualified. And then once you get nominated, there’s generally a further grueling paper interrogation that happens well before the hearing that should be another red flag that you’re in trouble because this isn’t just like appointing some country clubbing dilettante to be Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of Commerce.
The only thing I can figure out is that Trump has just completely trashed the entire vetting process, start to finish. People are being selected based on loyalty and fealty with sublime unconcern for qualification and, if they have a J.D., that’s it.