Barrett has spent virtually all of her professional life in academia. Until President Trump nominated her to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017, she had never been a judge, never worked in the government as a prosecutor, defense lawyer, solicitor general, or attorney general, or served as counsel to any legislative body—the usual professional channels that Supreme Court nominees tend to hail from. A graduate of Notre Dame law school, Barrett has almost no experience practicing law whatsoever—a hole in her resume so glaring that during her 7th Circuit confirmation hearing in 2017, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee were dismayed that she couldn’t recall more than three cases she’d worked on during her brief two years in private practice. Nominees are asked to provide details on 10.
Barrett has never tried a case to verdict or argued an appeal in any court, nor has she ever performed any notable pro bono work, even during law school. The ABA’s code of professional responsibility says lawyers should aspire to provide 50 hours a year of free legal services, with an emphasis on serving the poor in recognition of the fact that “only lawyers have the special skills and knowledge needed to secure access to justice for low-income people.” Chief Justice John Roberts famously met some of these requirements by representing a mass murderer on Florida’s death row.
In response to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s questions about her pro bono work, Barrett said she probably helped with such cases during her two years in private practice, but she couldn’t recall any details. Instead, she described her family’s participation in Angel Tree drives and volunteer work at a local soup kitchen—worthy projects undertaken by families all across America but not even close to the official definition of pro bono work. (Quelle)Über wen reden wir hier?
Über die Besetzung einer Schiedskommission eines Kaninchenzüchtervereins?
Nein. Diese absolut qualifikationslose Person, deren juristischen Kenntnisse wahrscheinlich allein aus dem regelmäßigen Ansehen von Anwaltsserien im Fernsehen stammen, ist jetzt lebenslanges Mitglied des höchsten Gerichts der USA, des Supreme Courts.
Keine Ahnung von nix, völlig unerfahren und deshalb wahrscheinlich leicht manipulierbar. Eine Kandidatin nach Trumps Herzen.
Ihre Vorgängerin rotiert wahrscheinlich im Grab.
Daß die Frau ultrakonservative Positionen vertritt: Geschenkt. Sollen sich doch die Feministinnen daran abarbeiten, daß die Barrett darin noch jeden alten weißen Mann übertrifft.
Aber jemanden zum obersten Richter zu machen, der schon ein Problem damit hat, einen Bleistift richtigrum zu halten, ist extrem erschütternd.
