Discussion: Watch A Trump Judicial Nominee Fail To Answer GOP Sen's Questions About Law

TPM Article Topics
#121

I think people are being a bit over-the-top on what lawyers are expected to know. The motion in limine answer was obviously embarrassing. But the rest were advanced civil procedure or evidence questions you may not even have learned in law school, or may have only encountered while cramming for the bar exam. Lawyers, especially with his age and experience don’t know everything off the top of their head, nor should they. I’ve clerked for a state district court judge for a couple years after law school, and I didn’t know the answer to the abstention rules and didn’t remember what Daubert was off the top, because we practice under state law and state rules of procedure (obviously with SCOTUS decisions sometimes taking precedent).

However, I’m not putting myself forward for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge! Far more concerning to me is the fact that he’s never tried a case, never taken a deposition, and never even argued a motion!

3 Likes
#122

Yes, as I said above, he went to UVA, where he made law review.

Interestingly, his questioner, Sen. Kennedy, also went to UVA, and also made law review there.

3 Likes
#123

Donald J. Trump attended Wharton…

#124

As an undergraduate, yes, that’s right.

2 Likes
#125

That is, as we say, the crux of the matter.

2 Likes
#126

I agree, my friend. I’m just saying with this GOP in charge of rubberstamping everything Trump does, it’s understandable why they’d think they could push people like this through.

1 Like
#127

Two lawyers (and both not litigators) reading this right now do not know what “Daubert” standard is. They both know what a motion in limine is.

#128

well, to be honest, that is my daily modus operandi

1 Like
#129

I wanna know how the SOB passed the bar exam!

#130

Lawyer here. Insane to put him in a federal district court when he clearly doesn’t know the first thing about the civil litigation process. Wouldn’t know anything about criminal trials either, both of which are super important in that role. Ironically, he’d be more qualified for a higher, i.e., appellate court, where practical experience in the trenches is still highly valuable, but not entirely critical. Having a hack like this is just dumb. 99.99% of what he will do won’t be political anyway, it’s just getting the nuts and bolts of running the legal system correctly. This is a hard job with a strong demand for high-level experience and having an accomplished professional in this role is about as important as it is for your average brain surgery. This is dumb and will hurt everyone that comes into his courtroom.

3 Likes
#131

It’s related to how and when expert testimony can be introduced and by whom, if my reading is accurate.

#132

And all this time I thought if you made law review, you were going to be a decent lawyer. Obviously not.

1 Like
#133

JFC! Idiotocracy was apparently a documentary.

America - This is what happens when you elect an unqualified boob as your President who then nominates a rogue’s list of unqualified boobs to gov’t positions.

Edit: I’d add that it is the stupidest and most unqualified who are able to delude themselves into believing that they are qualified. I am a lawyer and I know for a God’s honest fact that I am wholly unqualified to be a federal judge. I, for instance, don’t know jack shit about civil procedure or how to rule on objections, which are basic qualifications for a judge. I would bet my life that Trump’s boob knows far less than I do but, nonetheless, imagines himself qualified for the job.

I would also add that federal courts are not an on-the-job training program for Federalist Society ideologues. His ‘well, I’ll figure that out as I go along’ answers are an insult to the judiciary and to our country.

3 Likes
#134

Court stenographer…nah, that requires a quick and alert mind, focus and attention and knowing how to spell.

1 Like
#135

Curious. Wouldn’t some of these clueless idiots make mistakes that would be a cause for appeal?

1 Like
#136

Okay, I know there is a lot at stake here for a lot of people but this is some of the funniest shit I’ve ever seen. I can’t stop laughing when I watch the guy’s face sitting behind Sen Kennedy or the faces of the people behind the dipshit. Seriously the Trump-GOP has totally F’d up my TV watching-and I’m a Bravo fanatic-but even the Real Housewives seem boring compared to these assholes. When you are dumber and less self-aware than the cast of Vanderpump Rules? Holy Moly! :joy: And he wants to be a Judge! :joy:

5 Likes
#137

Well…Yes and no. Judges make mistakes all the time, or make a decision that is inconsistent with some appellate precedent. When faced with questions like this they’d put forth arguments and he and his clerk would research the issues.

The more concerning thing is the sheer amount of stuff he’d need to learn to be an effective judge. Also concerning is that he was clearly not prepared for this hearing, which is potentially indicative of how he’d act as a judge.

5 Likes
#138

LBJ… If he can walk, talk and chew gum at the same time… why don’t they just ask him to do something simple like that?

#139

He’s not a lawyer and has never even played one on TV, especially this TV segment!

1 Like
#140

Like asking a brain surgeon what the cerebral cortex is and having him say he doesn’t have that at his disposal. Trump only gets the best people. I wouldn’t hire this clown for a small claims case.

3 Likes
Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available