I said this during Monday morning’s press conference and it works. Consider:
Miers had clerked for the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, but had never served as a judge. She had neither taught nor written to any substantial extent on law. In private practice, as a corporate litigator, Miers had courtroom experience, but a scant and undistinguished track record of litigating in federal court (almost none litigating constitutional issues), and had never argued a case before the Supreme Court.
Neither were judges. Neither had any sort of bankable reputations to prove they could do the job.
On January 5, 2009, President-elect Barack Obama announced he would nominate Kagan to be Solicitor General. Before this appointment she had limited courtroom experience. She had never argued a case at trial, and had not argued before the Supreme Court of the United States.
Jane Hamsher’s brief compendium of liberal reaction expresses the same discontentment.
Some Senators will argue that Kagan lacks the requisite experience to be a justice on the Supreme Court. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) on the Senate Floor on March 19, 2009 his reservations for Kagan to be Solicitor General:
Well, so far as I can observe, other than time in the White House Counsel’s Office, Dean Kagan has only practiced law for 2 years in a real law firm practicing law. She had very limited experience in the things you would look for in a person of this nature.
If Kagan did not possess the experience as a judge or practitioner to be Solicitor General, then, even with a year under her belt as Solicitor General, it is hard to argue that she is qualified to be on the highest court in the land.