It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Open Letter to the United States Senate from Law Professors Around the Country

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

"we are united, as professors of law and scholars of judicial institutions"

Laughable at best but that sure has a lofty arrogant smugness to it. I can just see them now with their smug self righteous faces looking down at the little people. These "professors" sound like they are right out of Atlas Shrugged.

Men of reason have left the planet and we are left with this posers.




posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

Kind of telling that they only reference this one hearing versus all of his years on the bench, isn't it?

And remember, those who can, do; those who can't, teach (and far too often as professors).

In my short tenure as a paralegal, I worked directing with 4 different judges, and I'll tell you, some were very even-keeled in temperament, and some exhibited a very minimal amount of patience with stupidity in the courtroom.

The latter ones were generally the better judges, kept control of their courtroom and kept the attorneys, witnesses, defendants, and spectators in line.

I prefer a judge who has limited patience with stupidity, and that was what a lot of the questions thrown at Kavanaugh were--I can empathize with his reactions to some of the questions.

I get the feeling that you are unfit in any capacity to determine the fitness of a person to wear the judicial robe--what, per se, are you qualifications to make such a claim?

I'm betting on ideology and feelings coupled with no experience in the judicial field.

Tell me how wrong I am...



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
Kavanaugh never actually was a judge in a state or even county level couthouse. He was essentially an associate counse who got appointed by Bush jr to the US Court of Appeals.

This should bring out red flags. Unfortunately we jave sports team mentality and those who support Trump will never see a problem.


This is ridiculous.

Elon Musk had no training in rocket engineering. Steve Jobs became CEO with zero experience. Trump was never a politician. I can go on and on.

The training you have received is meaningless if you have shown the capacity to be good at the job.

P.S. Yes I threw in Trump to piss you off



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I call BS on the letter and on top of that I really don't care other than lets get it done!!




posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: FyreByrd

I hope these professors have this letter saved in a format where the name of the person they hate is easily changed. IMO, they will need to send it out at least 2 more times before 2024.


They didn't do anything to stop Gorsuch's confirmation.



Really they wrote the dame exact letter. Any Republican trying to be confirmed is always going to be fought.


lawprofessors.typepad.com...



No, they did not write the exact same letter. From you own link:


The opposition letter, available here, stresses Gorsuch's "judicial philosophy," as, "in his own words" "focusing backward, not forward.” With references to specific cases, it argues that Gursuch lacks "the necessary commitment to independence to hold government officials accountable," that he will "undermine reproductive rights," that he repeatedly "sides with big corporations over workers' rights," that he has "undermined federal laws meant to protect persons with disabilities," and that he will hamper agencies' ability to enforce Congressional laws meant to protect environmental and health safety.


Btw, the opposition letter is not "available" there. So, I can't see how many people signed that letter. However, I don't think it's unusual for a body of Constitutional law professors to provide input on a SCOTUS nominee. And so they did. What you failed to say, is that also submitted a letter of support. Also a broken link on that website.


The supporting letter, although brief, also tackles an issue unmentioned by the opposition letter: the previous nominee's treatment. The supporting letter states:

In closing, we note how little good comes from playing politics with judicial nominations. In his 2016 Year End Report, Chief Justice Roberts asked “why any lawyer would want a job that requires long hours, exacting skill, and intense devotion – while promising high stress, solitary confinement, and guaranteed criticism.” The political gauntlet that judicial nominations have become – highlighted most recently by the Senate’s outright refusal to consider the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland, also a brilliant judge eminently qualified for the Supreme Court – underscores this concern. Nominees expose themselves and their families to the withering glare of the modern media cycle and to political fortunes unconnected to their merit for the position. Senators of both parties employ arguments to delay and block nominees of the other party’s President, only to denounce these tactics when political fortunes are reversed. Litigants who depend on the efficient functioning of the courts to see justice done ultimately pay the price.


Where is Kavanaugh's letter of support. Not say there isn't one. Just haven't seen one.

Oh, and so you know, yes ALL SCOTUS nominees go through this "hell". It's seems customary for this body to present to views and invite their members to sign either one. No pressure.

Again, from you link.

Law Professors wishing to sign one or the other of the letters should do so quickly.


So, they didn't write the exact same letter. Kavanaugh's nomination didn't trigger anything out of the ordinary for this body. There probably is a letter of support from this body out there too, but let's bluster and whine about the oppostion letter and how unfair it is to question the integrity and temporment of an enititled intemporate biased truth dodger demanding to be promted to a life time position as a justice on the US Spremem Court.






edit on 4-10-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown




Apparently the liberal professors think when the media is calling you a serial rapist you should just sit there and smile ?

Or perhaps they expect a senior judge to keep their head when answering questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee , there's a time and place to vent and that wasn't it.



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: jrod
Kavanaugh never actually was a judge in a state or even county level couthouse. He was essentially an associate counse who got appointed by Bush jr to the US Court of Appeals.

This should bring out red flags. Unfortunately we jave sports team mentality and those who support Trump will never see a problem.


This is ridiculous.

Elon Musk had no training in rocket engineering. Steve Jobs became CEO with zero experience. Trump was never a politician. I can go on and on.

The training you have received is meaningless if you have shown the capacity to be good at the job.

P.S. Yes I threw in Trump to piss you off


You actually don't even need to be a lawyer to serve on the Supreme Court...



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 11:12 AM
link   
If "due process" is only required in a legal sense...

Then judicial temperament is as well...

A2D



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Fallingdown




Apparently the liberal professors think when the media is calling you a serial rapist you should just sit there and smile ?

Or perhaps they expect a senior judge to keep their head when answering questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee , there's a time and place to vent and that wasn't it.



Do you mean like Ruth Bader Ginsburg before and after Trump got elected ?



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: proximo

It is the reality. The guy was a lawyer who made judge because he knew the right people. He never served as a judge in county or state level trials.

Why is it so difficult for some to accept the truth?



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Best gauge for bias here is; who owns a pussyhat?



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: proximo

It is the reality. The guy was a lawyer who made judge because he knew the right people. He never served as a judge in county or state level trials.

Why is it so difficult for some to accept the truth?


It's true, but is that an unusual career path for a USSC Justice? I haven't researched the others, but I strongly suspect that they have similar career paths, having gone from academia or legal counsel in the federal government straight into a federal judicial appointment without ever serving as a state/county judge.


edit on 4-10-2018 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: vor78

Most recently was William Rehnquist. He went from Asst. Attorney General to SCOTUS.

full list


edit on 4-10-2018 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 03:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

No idea who Ruth Bader Ginsburg is but Kavanaugh himself has admitted that he may have been "too emotional at times" and said things that he "should not have said" during his Senate testimony.

The 53-year-old judge said: “I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said.”
Kavanaugh also sought to address concerns that his nakedly partisan display, in which he bizarrely challenged Senator Amy Klobuchar over her own drinking habits, should disqualify him from the court.
www.theguardian.com...



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 03:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Fallingdown

No idea who Ruth Bader Ginsburg is but Kavanaugh himself has admitted that he may have been "too emotional at times" and said things that he "should not have said" during his Senate testimony.

The 53-year-old judge said: “I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said.”
Kavanaugh also sought to address concerns that his nakedly partisan display, in which he bizarrely challenged Senator Amy Klobuchar over her own drinking habits, should disqualify him from the court.
www.theguardian.com...


You're in here flapping your lips and running your mouth and you don't even know who Ruth Bader Ginsberg is?

Why should anyone take anything you say seriously when you have no idea who one of the most prominent Justices of the last 20 years is?

Seriously though.

Thanks for letting us know that anything you say on this subject can be completely and unequivocally disregarded as uneducated nonsense.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 03:58 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

as the trainwreck of " opposition " to justice kavanaugh has mutated to " he is not fit / lacks demeanour " to serve

commenters SHOULD know who ginsberg is - hell they should know the other 7 SCOTUS justices too

but it takes` a special kind of wingnut mental gymnastics to " conclude " that kavanaugh is unfit , yet ginsberg is fit to serve



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Carcharadon




Why should anyone take anything you say seriously when you have no idea who one of the most prominent Justices of the last 20 years is?

Prominent to you perhaps but I'm not from your country , my not knowing who she is makes no difference to the quote I posted from Kavanaugh.




Thanks for letting us know that anything you say on this subject can be completely and unequivocally disregarded as uneducated nonsense.

Typical Trumper response , heavy on attack light on substance.

a reply to: ignorant_ape



commenters SHOULD know who ginsberg is - hell they should know the other 7 SCOTUS justices too but it takes` a special kind of wingnut mental gymnastics to " conclude " that kavanaugh is unfit , yet ginsberg is fit to serve

It takes another type of wingnut to read something that isn't there , I've made no comment about Kavanaugh's fitness to serve , the only comment I've made on Kavanaugh is on this thread because I think the letter is correct ... which Kavanaugh has admitted.

Attack for the sake of attack ignorant_ape , how ignorant is that.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Why are judges selected by a political party anyway? Wouldn't it be better coming from those with actual expertise in the field, like a Judicial appointments commission? All that happens is you get right side parties selecting right leaning judges and left side parties selecting left side Judges, instead of potentially selecting the best Judge, irrespective of political view. After all, surely the point of a Judge is to be impartial to left/right and just work within the definition of the law?



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: gortex

as the trainwreck of " opposition " to justice kavanaugh has mutated to " he is not fit / lacks demeanour " to serve

commenters SHOULD know who ginsberg is - hell they should know the other 7 SCOTUS justices too

but it takes` a special kind of wingnut mental gymnastics to " conclude " that kavanaugh is unfit , yet ginsberg is fit to serve


Ginsberg was an open activist at the time of her appointment. It was her successful pursuit of justice to gender equality that won her the nomination. What is Kavanaugh's sctivist platform? Roe V Wade?... because Sen Collins is confident he won't touch Roe V Wade.

So, what is Kavanaugh's cause that puts in the same category as Justice Ginsberg?
edit on 5-10-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

If you can't be bothered to know who the other SCOTUS justices are and their own judicial temperment, then why are making opinions about whether or not Kavanaugh has the appropriate temper?

You don't know. At this point, it's evident what you've been told is what you think.


If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.
- Samuel Goldwyn

You've learned that lesson well and let others do the opinion making for you.
edit on 5-10-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join