www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall the judicial monastery?

I was listening to the news tonight! They used the phrase "the judicial monastery".

Is this a new expression? Why do they call it "the judicial monastery"?

Dear Hiermonk Elias,

From what I've gathered, when they say 'judicial monastery' they mean the top echelon of judges, law professors, etc. I guess everyone within a certain 'circle'.

Zenovia

It is also my first time to hear the term "judicial monastery" and to be used in relation to the process of selection for a "Justice" of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, as the highest court in the land, indeed requires the optimum standard for membership.

As such, I surmise the term is used to imply that the choice for membership in this august body should be limited to the best, to the cream of the crop, to the grain not the chaff in the legal profession (bench and bar).

Amado

White House Counsel Harriet Myers was viewed as lacking the qualifications and judicial and/or legal experience of someone belonging to the "judicial monastery," thus a bad choice to become the replacement of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Maybe it's a comment on the disproportionate Catholic representation on the Supreme Court! Four judges are Catholic at present (Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts) and if Alito gets confirmed, that'll make 5/9 of the Supreme Court Catholic! Maybe that's the "judicial monastery?"

Interestingly, two of the justices are Jewish (Bader-Ginsburg and Breyer). That leaves only two justices to represent basically the basically 70% of America that is nominally Protestant (Stevens and Souter, assuming they're Protestant).

Other than the two supposed Protestants and the two Jews, the makeup is perfect!

Logos Teen

Dear LT:

Yeah, I like your idea!

We just hope that Judge Alito, openly self-described as a Catholic and a conservative along the line of Justice Scalia, will pass the "judgment" of the U.S. Senate Committee on Justice and, hopefully, of the full Senate!

In retrospect, Harriet Myers WAS a providential nomination which made the White House re-think its position after the "conservative" base of the Republicans wanted somebody more in the mold of CJ Roberts and was "forced" to come up with Judge Alito, one of the "most" conservative among the sitting Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals!

His being a Catholic, too, is a God-sent bonus!

Let's await the "fireworks" during the confirmation hearings which may last up to early next year!

Amado

Dear Amadeus,

Actually, I think the problem with the conservatives about Harriet Myers was that the President chose her because he was fearful over the 'records' all the judges had, and that the Democrats would certainly find something to scream about. It was not that she was not qualified, because the judge that retired had never served on a court either and he was considered the 'best'.

Also it was certain that she was a conservative, otherwise Pres. Bush would not have kept insisting for the Republicans to 'trust' him. He certainly knew her well.

I think the Republicans wanted President Bush to show a little forcefulness and to stop being so frightened at the tactics of the few liberal Senators such as Kennedy. You know whatever the Democrats do or say now, they will certainly get it back when they are in power. Under Clinton, the Republicans respected him as being the President of the U.S., and allowed him to put his 'liberal' judges in place expecting that the Democrats will do the same when a Republican President is in office.

Well, they are certainly not being gentlmanly about it now. Shame on them! They are changing the politics in the Senate now because they can expect quite a big fight, when and if the time ever comes that they will be in power.

Zenovia

Harriet Miers was in no way qualified; the appointment was croneyism at its worst. Her lack of a paper trail only served to confirm her utter lack of qualification.

That poor woman definitely got sent through the ringer, but she has no one to thank but the President himself.

Samuel Alito seems qualified. I don't know what the Democrats are complaining about. SURE, he's conservative...the President is conservative! It would be just as ludicrous for Republicans to have pitched a fit over a liberal president's nomination of a liberal judge, such as with Justice Bader-Ginsburg...(and they did). Such is the reality of American politics!

Logos Teen

Father Elias,

The phrase appears to have originated with Senator Patrick Leahy and was apparently intended to encompass sitting judges in general and federal appellate judges in particular. My interpretation would be an intended analogy to between the hallowed walls of a monastery and its enclosed society with the closed societal nature of the judiciary.

Many years,

Neil

It would be an improvement if we could get them to pray the liturgical hours and undergo a novitiate....
-D

Zenovia:

I did NOT say she was unqualified; she is the White House Counsel, isn't she?

I did say that she was viewed by those outside of the White House inner circle, particularly some Republican and Democratic Senators, as being, relatively, "not qualified" for U.S. the Supreme Court because of her lack of trial AND judicial experience. More so because Myers' nomination followed that of CJ Roberts, who possessed all the desirable "qualifications."

It is logical for some to value "judicial experience" as a prerequisite for a seat in the U.S. Supreme Court, regardless of the fact that many justices of the highest court have been previously appointed without, or a little, experience in judicial proceedings.

Likewise, people in the legal (and judicial) profession put premium on "experience," all things being equal.

Amado

Wasn't the expression 'the bar' also of monastic (or Templar) origin? I just was not aware of any of that language crossing the ocean! Very interesting.

Elias