no. (roses_rejoice) wrote,

  • Mood:

This just in from the WELL, DUH department...

John Roberts rated "well qualified" by the ABA

WELL, let's look at his record, shall we? Hmmm, top student at a top law school, clerked for a judge who from what I have heard was the Top Appellate Judge and Ultimate Eminent Feeder of His Day, then clerked for the future CJ of the Supremes, assisted the Attorney General, was special counsel to the President, worked at a well-regarded biglaw firm, was a honcho in the Solicitor General's office, argued 39 times in front of the Supreme Court, is regarded as one of the best if not THE best oral arguer of the last 25 years, and has recently been a judge on one of the most prestigious circuits in the land. (oh yeah he is also nice, modest, works and plays well with others, et cetera, et cetera...) If this does not earn you a "well qualified" rating from the ABA then I guess you would have to sprout wings and fly to the moon. This guy is more experienced than most of the justices we have put on the High Court bench since I have been alive. It's like asking if Chuck Yeager was "well qualified" to break the sound barrier.

What is really funny is that the AP is reporting it as if his qualifications could possibly have been in any doubt. I guess there is always that chance that someone will have a skeleton hiding in their robing room, with a smoking gun in one bony hand and the other stuck in a cookie jar.
  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded