Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Freethinker65

(9,932 posts)
26. She is not nominated for a Supreme Court seat.
Thu Jan 26, 2023, 06:02 PM
Jan 2023

If Kennedy asked her about her interpretation of how the US Constitution itself could be amended/re-ratified and she had no clue, that would be more troubling.

All nominees have been prepping by combing through their own records of writings and decisions for potential gotcha questions. Could she possibly have just forgotten which Article was which in the Constitution. At least she didn't answer something about the 7th Amendment! The horrors!

Refresh my memory, in your own words, Senator Kennedy Freethinker65 Jan 2023 #1
She should have known. There's no excuse for a federal judicial nominee Ocelot II Jan 2023 #2
Yup. Absolutely. Who the hell vetted her? hlthe2b Jan 2023 #13
Yah Effete Snob Jan 2023 #18
She is not nominated for a Supreme Court seat. Freethinker65 Jan 2023 #26
And you somehow think a FEDERAL judge should not know the constitution? Really? hlthe2b Jan 2023 #27
All federal judges should be familiar with these issues, not just Supreme Court nominees. Ocelot II Jan 2023 #31
Agree. In order to make rulings on a case, Judges review the law and constitution as it pertains. Freethinker65 Jan 2023 #42
They decided them by careful review of applicable case law etc. nt Phoenix61 Jan 2023 #49
A sitting federal judge shouldn't have to look up what is covered Ocelot II Jan 2023 #52
I agree. She should not have been nominated. nt Trueblue Texan Jan 2023 #58
I would love one of the news media to ask Kennedy about a specific article of the Constitution, and JohnSJ Jan 2023 #3
Don't let Kennedy's Foghorn Leghorn demeanor fool you. Ocelot II Jan 2023 #5
He knew the answers because he had the opportunity Phoenix61 Jan 2023 #48
The general topics of the articles of the Constitution isn't snap knowledge Ocelot II Jan 2023 #50
So you have instant recall of everything you learned Phoenix61 Jan 2023 #51
No, but I didn't have to look up the topics covered by articles II and V Ocelot II Jan 2023 #53
Kennedy is a fake "good ole boy." He is an Oxford-educated attorney hlthe2b Jan 2023 #15
Who of course calls any half way liberal, Elite, Latte Drinking blah blah blah n/t hibbing Jan 2023 #21
She should have said - walkingman Jan 2023 #4
or. im a judge not a constitutional scholar. let me refresh my memory and we can have a discussion. bullimiami Jan 2023 #11
That was Constitutional Law 101. She should have known the answers Ocelot II Jan 2023 #20
Disagree. bullimiami Jan 2023 #78
Yeah, but then she loses Manchin and Sinema's vote Polybius Jan 2023 #46
Yikes enough Jan 2023 #6
Fuck Kennedy but she should have known the answer. Elessar Zappa Jan 2023 #7
And if a Republican judicial nominee had responded that way Ocelot II Jan 2023 #14
If we ask it, it's weaponizing the hearing. Captain Zero Jan 2023 #41
Amy Coney Barrett couldn't name the 5 rights in the First Amendment underpants Jan 2023 #8
That doesn't mean Democrats should also appoint judges who don't know the Constitution. Ocelot II Jan 2023 #19
Got that. underpants Jan 2023 #38
"tu quoque" is a logical fallacy no matter who employs it. n/t malthaussen Jan 2023 #33
I got that. underpants Jan 2023 #37
Frat boy Brett Kavangh was stumped easily enough. Farmer-Rick Jan 2023 #59
old Foghorn Leg horn snowybirdie Jan 2023 #9
Amy Coney Barrett couldn't name the five freedoms protected by the 1st Amendment Grins Jan 2023 #10
That doesn't excuse an appointee nominated by a Democrat from knowing Ocelot II Jan 2023 #23
What is so basic about memorizing the number of a section of the Constitituion? MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #63
old Foghorn Leg horn snowybirdie Jan 2023 #12
Fuck Kennedy but she should have known the answers. Ocelot II Jan 2023 #16
Yep, he has. NYC Liberal Jan 2023 #32
Didn't Republicans push candidates who never practiced law? RandySF Jan 2023 #17
well by republican standards this makes this person eligible for the Supreme Court. republianmushroom Jan 2023 #22
Right-wing gotcha question jmowreader Jan 2023 #24
A judge who is a candidate for the federal bench should know basic constitutional law. Ocelot II Jan 2023 #29
I agree with you. malthaussen Jan 2023 #35
You can't be serious in contending District Court judges have no occasion to address Article II onenote Jan 2023 #45
If her mind blanked, I can easily overlook it. Torchlight Jan 2023 #25
Oh please. Being able to recall the name of something doesn't Phoenix61 Jan 2023 #28
Google software engineers are expected to know... Lucky Luciano Jan 2023 #40
As someone with a BS in computer science I believe you are wrong. Phoenix61 Jan 2023 #47
Not a random article or obscure line in the constitution at all Lucky Luciano Jan 2023 #55
And one she may not have used in her career even once. Phoenix61 Jan 2023 #56
Ok - if she hasn't used it once, then probably not qualified. Lucky Luciano Jan 2023 #57
Article II- The executive power. onenote Jan 2023 #67
Yup, but as noted below, I doubt you know the citation to the US Reports for Youngstown Sheet & Tube MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #76
apply... myohmy2 Jan 2023 #30
If she were a GOP judical nominee, this board would be all over her... malthaussen Jan 2023 #34
I would be disappointed in a civics student who couldn't answer that question dsc Jan 2023 #36
I hate Kennedy, but it seems like he did show this person is utterly unqualified. Lucky Luciano Jan 2023 #39
I'm not sure she's completely unqualified; she seems to have a solid background Ocelot II Jan 2023 #54
I have to admit... appmanga Jan 2023 #43
Senator John Kennedy has done this before to nominees copperearth Jan 2023 #44
Were I in here shoes, I would. Have been embarrassed... Mark.b Jan 2023 #60
You would think a nominee would bone up a little on the Constitution before being questioned. Martin68 Jan 2023 #61
So, Amy Coney Barrett doesn't know what the First Amendment covered, but that's ok? MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #62
Nope. Neither is "okay." onenote Jan 2023 #64
Missing a memorization question doesn't make a candidate unfit of the judiciary MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #65
Not knowing what Article II of the Constitution is -- not a "memorization"" question. onenote Jan 2023 #66
Knowing what is IN it is relevant, not what the specific citation. MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #68
That's absurd. onenote Jan 2023 #69
Well, since I have been a lawyer for several decades, it's not "absurd" MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #70
I've been one for forty years and I wouldn't want to work with a lawyer that didn't know Article II onenote Jan 2023 #72
Chill. There are equally many others that disagree with you. MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #75
Are you a lawyer? Just asking. n/t MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #71
Yes. Became a member of the bar in 1978. Law Review. Honors graduate onenote Jan 2023 #73
Ok. Fair enough! MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #74
I agree that asking for the citation to a particular case would be over the line. onenote Jan 2023 #77
Good points, and on that, I think we agree MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #79
Hate when one of our own looks like an empty suit BeyondGeography Feb 2023 #80
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Sen. Kennedy stumps Biden...»Reply #26