Maybe the Supreme Court confirmation process is something I shouldn’t comment on, because what I say could be taken as political commentary. I don’t think it is political commentary, though, except to the extent that it’s about politicians. Politicians who claim that they can discern a Supreme Court nominee’s bias in favor of one type of litigant over another based on particular opinions the nominee wrote as a judge, or particular clients the nominee represented as a lawyer, are perpetuating the misconception that judges decide cases (or should decide cases) based on which party the judge thinks is more deserving, or that lawyers represent clients because they agree with the clients’ views.
A judge’s job is to decide cases based on the law, not based on whether they think one party is more deserving than the other. If a correct application of the law means that the more sympathetic party loses, then the more sympathetic party should lose. Similarly, a lawyer’s job is to advocate for the client’s interests under the law, regardless of whether or not the lawyer’s personal interests are the same as the client’s. If the client’s legal interests are protected, then the lawyer has done his or her job.
The contents of this blog, this web site, and any writings by me that are linked here, are all my personal commentary. None of it is intended to be legal advice for your situation.