Supreme court nominee Harriet Miers meets Senator Herbert Kohl (D-WI) in his office in Washington, DC, October 20, 2005. The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s top Republican and Democrat told U.S. Supreme nominee Miers on Wednesday to elaborate on what they criticized as inadequate answers to their questionnaire. At a news conference, Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA), described the written responses by President George W. Bush’s nominee as ‘insufficient,’ and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VA), said some had complained the answers were even ‘insulting.’

Flap over at Patterico posted the following in the comments section of Angry Clam’s post, Speculation:

So, Patrick et. al. tell me what are the qualifications then for a supreme court justice?

Just some thoughts……

AC posted his reply, My Criteria.

More on AC’s reply later……..

Now, Flap wants to hear from the rest of you.

What are your criteria to be nominated as a supreme court justice?

Comments and/or Trackbacks – Please NO SPAM!

Update #1

Patterico’s Criteria:

1. The ability to write well

2. Analytical ability

3. The ability to read and process information.

Angry Clam’s

1) Some indication of academic excellence- this can be fulfilled by (a) attending a very good school and being on Law Review or Order of the Coif (a top 10% society), (b) holding an appellate clerkship, (c) publishing a number of pieces of quality legal scholarship, or (d) having a successful appellate practice (appellate law is much more academic than the practical and tactical trial practices).

2) Demonstrated and extensive ability with a range of litigation on federal issues, preferably including constitutional law, and preferably at the appellate or Supreme Court level. This can be done through private appellate practice or several years’ of service on the federal bench.

3) Some indication of a consistent philosophy of judging. Note that this need not be as technical or developed as Scalia’s originalism or Breyer’s representation-reinforcement- it may be as basic as Roberts’ Bickelian judicial modesty. I just want something that demonstrates that the nominee has considered how he understands his role as a judge in our system, as well as his method of approaching cases before him.

Notice how there’s no “we need an evangelical” or any other religion, no “we need a woman,” no “she should be from outside the same three schools that most judges come from,” “she needs a good heart,” or any other of the “representational” issues that the White House seems to think are important in an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Hummmmmmm Flap wonders what the other anti-Miers pundits qualifications are?

What are the standards?

HINT: The Constitution is silent on the matter but gives the President the “CALL”.

Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers arrives for a meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, October 18, 2005.

Reuters has Bush defends Miers as having same judicial philosophy.

President George W. Bush, trying to soothe critics from his own Republican Party, said on Thursday he was fulfilling a campaign promise by nominating Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court because she shared his judicial philosophy.

Bush’s pick has been criticized by members of his own political party who say they do not know how she would rule on issues important to conservatives because she has never been a judge.

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, on Wednesday criticized Miers’ written answers to a questionnaire as “insufficient” and complained about a “chaotic” confirmation process so far.

The President will not cut and run on this nomination.

Completing Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaires is sooooooo important.

Some of the elitiist conservative pundits want to make Flap gag.

And Arlen Specter….. on the same page as Robert Byrd.

But Bush has steadfastly defended Miers, who is the White House counsel, and said he picked her because she had never been a judge and would bring a “fresh outlook” to the bench.

“She will strictly interpret the Constitution,” Bush said at a news conference with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

“I said that when I ran for president. I said, ‘If you elect me, I will name people that will have that judicial philosophy,”‘ Bush said.

He said the questionnaire shows Miers’ judicial philosophy, which was the main reason he chose her for the Supreme Court.

“But out of this will come a clear picture of a competent, strong, capable woman who shares the same judicial philosophy that I share,” Bush said.

Let the hearings begin…..get on with it.