Skip to comments.Which current Supreme Court justices are DUMB by historical standards?
Posted on 09/26/2013 9:04:48 PM PDT by richardb72
Courts are being dumbed down because politicians are trying to keep the smartest and most persuasive judges off the bench, argues conservative economist John Lott in his recently released book, Dumbing Down the Courts: How Politics Keeps the Smartest Justices Off the Bench.
While confirmations have been getting tougher for all the nominees, smarter, more influential nominees have had the hardest time getting confirmed, Lott told The Daily Caller in an interview about his book. There is a simple reason for this. Judges who understand the law and are articulate may be able to convince other judges hearing cases to change how they vote. They may also write opinions that influence other judges around the country.
Lott, who also authored the best-selling More Guns, Less Crime, says the statistical record bears out his claim.
For example, someone from a top 10 law school, who graduated in the top 10 percent of their class, and who clerked on both a Circuit Court and the Supreme Court, it takes them 158 percent longer to get confirmed, Lott said. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Elena Kagan no contest
Anthony Kennedy is an utter dumbbell who regularly refutes his own arguments in court decisions.
The “Wise Latina” and Roberts should make the list too.
Add Ginsburg and we have a majority.
I think Roberts is pretty smart. He was very impressive in the confirmation hearings. Less so in the Obamacare decision. Don’t confuse compromised with stupid.
Obviously, that genius John Roberts is clueless when it comes to the underlying philosopy the Constitution is built on.
I agree with Defiant. I think Roberts was compromised.
Sotomayor, Ginsburg, Kagan, Roberts, and Kennedy.
Well he named two of three that first came to my mind....Kagan and Sotomayer. Lott left out the MOST obvious (based on his recent decisions) John roberts
Experientially John Roberts is an a%%. Period end of story. Any man who is intellectually as dishonest as Roberts should NEVER be on the court.
The noble Hispanic woman?
I can believe this.
Scalia and Thomas are not.....not sure about Roberts (issue with his adopted kids, NSA got him) and the rest apparently know noth’n
NSA spying did its job on him
The four liberal robots (decisions always predictable)
Almost the entire scotus is from Harvard, Yale or Stanford.
It is Harvard Princeton and Stanford.
“Harvard lays claim to the most Supreme Court justices — five went there for law school. Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor both chose Princeton for their undergraduate degrees; Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer went west for Stanford. John Paul Stevens is the only justice with midwest connections — he went to the University of Chicago for undergrad and Northwestern for law school.”
Forget tests of intelligence. Focus on the virtue and adherence to constitutional law of these people. If they're stupid, they are excused from stupid decisions. I prefer to call them evil when they cater to evil.
stupid enough to be compromised.
The runner up to Chief Justice Warren, is Chief Justice Roberts!!!
Kagan is clearly not very bright. There's no doubt the rest of them are pretty smart. Four of them simply don't care what the Constitution actually says. Roberts' 0bamacare ruling is a typical liberal opinion: facile, contradictory, and ultimately rather silly. That doesn't mean he's stupid.
Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, Elena Kagan, and the unwise Latina Sotomajor...
All of them
the federal government's ability to regulate intrastate commerce, stemming from the ability to regulate interstate commerce, is still valid even when that regulation prohibits interstate commerce, even if this would "pull the rug out from under them" because, well, we say so.
That decision was an insult to logical thinking. (False implies true!)
Kelo was terribly unjust, though not without some legal-reasoning, and could be alleviated if eminent-domain were used to seize all of the justices's properties (via
projections, of course). I think you'd be amazed at how quick the Supreme Court could act once its members were directly influenced/impacted/inconvenienced by one of their rulings.
I'm sure I could think of more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.