Bench Memos

Patricia Millett’s Strained Relationship with Truth

When a judge is interviewing a second-year law student for a clerkship, the judge will often ask the student to name the judge whose approach to the law they most admire, or may ask them to describe the judicial philosophy they most identify with. A top-tier applicant – even after only two years of law school — would never be so foolish as to answer his potential employer in this way:

While I have the greatest respect for the Supreme Court’s members, I cannot claim familiarity with any particular judicial philosophies the justices might possess. Nor do I have a judicial philosophy myself . . .

D.C. Circuit nominee Patricia Millett is either less qualified or less candid than the typical clerkship applicant, since that is the answer she provided, under oath, when Senator Ted Cruz asked her, ”Describe how you would characterize your judicial philosophy, and identify which U.S. Supreme Court justice’s judicial philosophy from the Warren, Burger, or Rehnquist Courts is most analogous with yours.” 

Of course the average guy on the street, or even the average lawyer who practices in lower courts, might be able to get away with her answer. Such a person may not have gone to a law school where philosophical distinctions were highlighted, or she may have simply been too busy to read the many high-profile books, articles, and speeches by Justices Scalia, Breyer, Thomas, and Ginsburg on their philosophies.

But Millett’s Akin Gump bio credits her with 32 oral arguments at the Supreme Court, and she is well known in D.C. appellate circles, where matters of judicial philosophy are regular topics of conversation. For someone with her experience before the Court to be unfamiliar with the philosophy of any justice in the past half-century would fall somewhere between unprofessional and malpractice. Her clients would be justly outraged if she confessed such ignorance to them, and the Supreme Court Historical Society, on whose Board of Trustees she sits, would probably be reevaluating her role.

The alternate explanation – and I believe the more likely one — does more justice to Millett’s intelligence but less to her character. Every lawyer who knows Millett, and every lawyer who has any interest whatsoever in her D.C. Circuit nomination, knows that she is familiar with the judicial philosophies of at least a few Supreme Court justices. And they also understand why she wouldn’t want to provide a direct, truthful response to Senator Cruz’s question. But that does not justify her submission of transparently false response to a U.S. senator’s inquiry.

Carrie Severino — Carrie Severino is chief counsel and policy director to the Judicial Crisis Network.

Most Popular

World

Enoch Powell’s Immigration Speech, 50 Years Later

The 20th of this month marks a significant anniversary in Britain. For it is the 50th anniversary of what is probably the most famous -- and certainly the most notorious -- speech by any mainstream politician since the war. On April 20, 1968, Enoch Powell gave a speech to the Conservative Political Centre in ... Read More
Religion

Goldberg, God, and Human Rights

Jonah Goldberg opens his National Review cover story, an excerpt from his new book, with some provocative assertions: I want to offer amendments to three of Jonah’s claims in this passage. First, I think certain human rights can be described as, in an important sense, “God-given.” The protection of rights ... Read More
Economy & Business

A Trump Trade and Economic Doctrine

If the Treasury Department’s recent semiannual report is any guide, the Trump administration still doesn’t quite get it when it comes to trade imbalances. “The US government has all the tools it needs to achieve balanced trade without risking a trade war,” writes Joseph Gagnon for the Peterson Institute ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Comey–Trump Dance

I never thought the Comey book would make much news for the simple reason that it would be outrageous if it did. If Comey knew something relevant and important about the Russia investigation that we didn’t already know, he couldn’t possibly put it in his book. Let’s say he did have something big on the ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Underappreciated Barbara Bush

Making the click-through worthwhile: realizing how little we appreciated Barbara Bush when she was in the public’s eye; Mike Pompeo meets with Kim Jong Un and the long road to presidential attendance at high-stakes summit meetings; and Democrats propose a vast, expensive new plan to tackle unemployment . . . at ... Read More
White House

McConnell and Russian Election Interference

Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell says he won't bring legislation to the floor to protect special prosecutor Robert Mueller's investigation. The incident has inspired liberals to revive their complaints that McConnell put party before country in the last weeks of the 2016 election. The charge, which I have ... Read More