That’s the title of my new Confirmation Tales post, which begins:

As we have seen, in recent decades there has been a dramatic shift in the professional background of Supreme Court justices.
Over the first seven decades of the 20th century, justices were drawn from a variety of backgrounds: United States senators, U.S. Attorneys General and other top Department of Justice officials, state supreme court justices, and governors. While service as a federal appellate judge was also a common qualification, there was a stretch of nearly 40 years in which not a single one of the 24 justices appointed during that period was serving as a federal appellate judge when he was appointed.
In sharp contrast, of the past 14 justices who have been appointed to the Court—beginning with Antonin Scalia in 1986—13 of them (all but Elena Kagan) were serving on a federal court of appeals at the time of their appointment.
To make the point another way: Until 1969, the Court never had more than three former federal appellate judges. When John Roberts became chief justice in 2005, the Court had eight former federal appellate judges for the first time ever. The total reached nine when Samuel Alito replaced Sandra Day O’Connor in 2006. The full Court has had eight justices with federal appellate experience ever since Kagan replaced John Paul Stevens in 2010.
Let’s explore what might explain this dramatic shift.

Please sign up for Confirmation Tales.