Re: Harriet Miers Appointed to Supreme Court
[QUOTE=thesightless]at least 22 of the justices of the supreme court's history haven't had judgeships. most noteably, her predessor, william rhenquist. it isnt a bad thing, because she was a trial lawyer her entire legal career, so she is very much in touch with the actual feild of law, rather than those who write the law, the politicians. we could have elected a full bench of harvard educated, lifetime judges who never went the long route through the system, but that would leave them in a position of simply being knowledgeable of ""law itself", but using the ""first time judges"" enables the courts to keep a ""reality check"" of sorts on the US legal system. she has done the grind, been through the BS of the courts, and frankly, the choice is pleasing the left, and the moderate republicans, its the far right that isnt happy. a woman to boot helps the diversity cause.[/QUOTE]
It is true that there have been a number of justices over the years that weren't judges before they were appointed to the Supreme Court, but I'd still feel more comfortable with someone who had spent some time as a judge. The role of a judge is very different from the role of an advocate -- for example, who knows how well she will be able to leave the advocacy behind and truly be impartial?
I'm getting a huge kick out of the far right's reaction to her.