I don't know how the appointment of judges works beyond the local level where I vote. What would it take to get Posner appointed to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals? It seems his worldview is much needed there.
Posner has been a Judge on the Court of Appeals since 1981, on the 7th circuit. SCOTUS was never in the cards for him. He's an intellectual giant, but he's been on record for a long time in favor of the legalization of marijuana and hard drugs.
I was asking specifically about this from the article "And Posner's seat on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals doesn't give him a direct role in shaping patent policy because (as we discussed yesterday) the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction over patent appeals. Posner was able to hear the Apple v. Motorola case because he was temporarily sitting in as a trial judge."
Ah I see. I'm not aware of an instance of an appellate judge moving to another circuit. I suppose technically the President could nominate him. I actually dislike that the Federal Circuit gets all patent cases. The end result in no circuit splits and SCOTUS ends up hearing a lot less patent cases than it should.
He's probably one of the most influential judges in the country outside the Supreme Court Justice, and is more influential in legal academia than even most of the Justices. He doesn't have to sit on the Federal Circuit to influence policy. He has a pretty big soap box as a judge on the 7th Circuit and a professor at the University of Chicago.
Richard Allen Posner (born January 11, 1939) is an American jurist, legal theorist, and economist who is currently a <judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago> and a Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School. He is an influential figure in the law and economics school of thought.
"Posner has written several opinions sympathetic to abortion rights, including a decision that held that "partial-birth abortion" was constitutionally protected in some circumstances."
Never gonna happen.
(not trying to turn this into an abortion conversation, just saying that once that becomes well-known, no way he gets past the senate)
Isn't that why the constitution provides for <Nine> justices, though? ;) Is it not odd(?) that USA appoints people with no ideas ever expressed,[1] over peoplel like Posner who actually have something important to say? The purpose of having Nine is to allow for differences of opinion on minor things (in the scheme of Statesmanship), while having the best and the brightest contibute unique expertise.
Ms. Kagan’s responses, during a long and sometimes tense day of parrying with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, were similar to those of Supreme Court nominees past. But unlike her predecessors, Ms. Kagan wrote a 1995 article calling for judicial nominees to be more forthcoming. On Tuesday, minutes into her testimony, she backpedaled, saying she now believed it would be inappropriate even to answer questions that might “provide some kind of hints” about her views on matters of legal controversy.
Isn't that why the constitution provides for <Nine> justices, though?
The number of justices on SCOTUS isn't set by the Constitution, it's set by Congress. Throughout history there have been as many as 10 and as few as 5 justices.
Is it not odd(?) that USA appoints people with no ideas ever expressed, over peoplel like Posner who actually have something important to say?
He'd be a great, inspired pick for anyone but the real reason he won't be appointed is his age. Politically the dominant strategy is to appoint justices that can be expected to hold the seat for at least two decades.
Yes, I think he's got a problem there, because his best chance is the Democrats picking him, but his best fit is with the Republicans, for whom he isn't orthodox enough. If a Democratic president picked him, he'd probably be confirmed: he has enough "non-left" background for bipartisan credibility (a Chicago-school law-and-economics background), but has enough left-leaning positions that at least some Dems shouldn't find him impossible to support. But, he's 72, which limits his appeal as a bipartisan choice. And as a straight Republican nominee has has problems on things like abortion. So I would guess he's not destined for the Supreme Court.
Federal judges are appointed by the president. Poser is on the 6th circuit (appointed by by Reagan, maybe?) and I'm not sure I've ever heard of a judge going from one circuit to another.
The 6th Circuit covers both Nashville and Detroit and therefore has been the source some music-specific copyright case law. For example, about sampling. See: Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films for an example.
The 6Th Circuit: Home to the Hatfields and the McCoys, and probably more than a few bootleggers. =] I can see why it would spring to mind. All this IP talk must have put it on the mind.
