Jessica Eaves Mathews
If you are following the confirmation hearing of Amy Barrett, you likely heard praise from GOP senators about how she doesn’t have any notes in front of her. They called it “impressive.” Let me tell you why it is the opposite.
I’m a 25+ year lawyer who spent over a decade litigating cases. You would NEVER show up to court, a meeting, a hearing, etc…. with no notes. Never. Ever. Ever. Ever.
It isn’t something to brag about. It shows arrogance and hubris to show up to a hearing of such importance with nothing to reference.
It also concerns me about her judgment – you would never advise a client, argue a motion, go to trial, or even show up at a meeting with a judge, a law partner, a client or a boss without lots of paperwork, notebooks, notes and files with you.
I would never try to rely on my own memory for anything. Even attorneys who argue in front of the US Supreme Court rely heavily on notes and files (cases, books, outlines, etc…).
One big reason you never rely on memory is that the law is always changing, so you could be basing your thoughts and analysis on old information. It just doesn’t work in our profession, no matter how smart you are. So we learn as lawyers to not rely on memory. I also taught law school for 4 years, and I would never rely on memory for that either, even though I was technically an expert in the subject matter of those classes.
It is not impressive that she doesn’t have any notes.
Look at RBG at her confirmation hearing. She was arguably one of the most brilliant legal minds of her (or any) generation, and she didn’t dare show up to her confirmation hearing without notes. And she used them. Look at the photos and videos of her confirmation hearing. She even had books with her.
RBG was revered by everyone on both sides of the aisle as one of the great legal minds of her generation. She spent years arguing cases in front of the Supreme Court and had the respect of all of the justices also. Despite her impeccable and stellar record, she showed up to the confirmation hearing prepared to talk substance, with notebooks, files and books, and referred to them throughout the hearing. She took the process seriously and gave thoughtful, honest and serious answers to hard questions.
Amy Barrett has been a judge for less than 3 years, yet she shows up to this most serious, solemn occasion with nothing – not a single file, note or outline. She refuses to answer even a single substantive question, and dares to reference RBG as the reason (it is not true that RBG refused to answer substantive questions at her hearing). Amy Barrett has not yet earned the respect that RBG had and yet RBG would never have dreamed of showing up with nothing but her memory.
I celebrate any successful woman, and those of you who know me know that I have spent a big part of my life being a champion and mentor to other women – I love seeing women succeed. But I don’t respect anyone (male or female) who has the arrogance and hubris to show up to this specific occasion unprepared to discuss substance. She is not worthy of taking RBG’s seat for that reason (regardless of how smart she is). I don’t doubt she is an excellent professor and smart academic. That doesn’t make her qualified to serve for life as justice of the Supreme Court.
But let’s be real. The reason she didn’t bring any notes, reference materials, files, etc….. is because she was coached carefully and had zero intention of answering any substantive questions. She knew her confirmation was assured, and knew she only had to skate through the hearings, giving minimal answers, and she was guaranteed a life-time appointment on the highest court in the land. Her arrogance comes from knowing that she could say nothing and still get confirmed.
Opinion They rushed her to conformation because they are not sure if Trump will win or not. This is wrong as it gets.