Peter Lattman has a lot more over at the WSJ Law Blog. Lattman's very interesting post includes a reaction from Chief Justice Roberts: "The federal judiciary is sorry to lose one of its finest judges, but our loss is certainly Duke Law School’s gain. I have personally benefited from his counsel on several occassions, and look forward to his leadership in the legal academy."
Features
Stuff from us
Academic Legal Writing: personalized bookplates
In Search of Jefferson's Moose
Sources on the Second Amendment
Do you think you might cover Nifong's Bar Complaint? Or are dishonest, the words of the Bar complaint, attorneys not a good subject for attorneys to discuss.
Where would the discussion lead, right?
LC1
Yes, and in the WSJ article he says it is a big part of why he left.
Is there a shortage of qualified people ready to step into the judgeship? I suspect many people could be great judges and be happy with a measely low 6 figure salary. Of course some brilliant people are politically indifferent and will therefor never be appointed.
And I'm glad to see that Brodhead has better judgment on this issue than on his early support for Nifong.
The WSJ item linked by Orin points out, however, that Levi was appointed to the bench by the first President Bush in 1990, and that he had been named as a U.S. Attorney in 1986 which means he was nominated to that post by Reagan. So I doubt he's any sort of full-throated liberal either.
This appointment strikes me as a good move by Duke.