Another Joe Biden judicial nominee has been exposed as completely unqualified for the position she’s been nominated for. Earlier this month, Biden nominated Robin M. Meriweather to be a judge on the Court of Federal Claims. This week, she got stumped by Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) after being asked some simple questions about how the Court of Federal Claims works.
It took Kennedy no time to expose the fact that she had no idea.
Kennedy started off by asking her how many motions she’d argued in the Court of Federal Claims, forcing her to admit that, despite having argued “hundreds of motions involving complex civil claims in numerous courts, the Court of Federal Claims is not one of those courts.”
“Okay, so the answer is zero.” Kennedy clarified.
“That is correct, senator.”
"Okay, how many cases have you tried in the Court of Federal Claims?”
“I have tried a civil case in the District Court for the District of Columbia; most of my cases have been resolved on motions; none of those cases have been in the Court of Federal Claims, although they involve similarly complex matters under civil laws,” Meriweather began, clearly trying to avoid the real answer.
But Kennedy wasn’t falling for it. “So the answer is zero?” he asked.
“That is correct, senator.”
With that settled, Kennedy changed gears to confirm whether she understood the basic concepts that would make her competent at the job she’d been nominated for.
“Tell me the grounds for granting a new trial in the Court of Federal Claims,” Kennedy asked.
“All of the trials in the Court of Federal Claims are bench trials, and the Court of Federal Claims, although it is not bound by the federal rules of civil procedure, its rules mirror those rules when applicable,” Meriweather began. “So it’s my understanding that the same rules that would apply in the district court are also applied in that context, but if I were presented with a motion for a new trial, should I be confirmed as a judge on the Court of Federal Claims, I would of course consult the rules of court—of the Court of Federal Claims.”
“So what are the grounds for granting a new trial?” Kennedy repeated.
“My understanding is that a new trial, you would have to comply with the applicable rules,” Meriweather said. You can tell by her face in the video below she is absolutely terrified of this questioning.
“I know that, but what are they? What are the grounds? You said that the rules are identical to the Court of Federal Claims and Federal District Court. I’m not sure that’s accurate, but just tell me, what are the grounds for granting a new trial in the Court of Federal Claims?” Kennedy asked.
At this point, Meriweather has already figured out that she’s in trouble and has continued to filibuster with long answers, perhaps to run out the clock and be rescued by a Democrat.
“Senator, that is not an issue I have had occasion to consider before, despite my extensive civil experience and my familiarity not only with the federal rules of civil procedure but I’ve also reviewed the rules of the Court of Federal Claims. But if I were presented […] with that question, should I be confirmed, I would again consult the rules and follow the precedent.”
However, Kennedy wasn’t falling for this answer and challenged her to name “one single ground for granting a new trial."
The question ultimately forced Meriweather to admit she never had any experience with this issue and was thus unfamiliar with rules.
“Okay, okay, what’s a contract of adhesion?” Kennedy asked as a follow-up.
“Senator, I’m familiar with contract law, the concept of contracts of adhesion—“ Merriweather began.
“Yeah, you’re gonna see a lot of that. That’s what federal court of – Federal Claims does. What’s a contract of adhesion?”
“Senator, the court of federal claims does handle a lot of procurement cases. Those typically turn on interpretations–”
"Yes, ma’am, but I’m going to run out of time,” Kennedy interjected. "What’s a contract of adhesion? If you don’t know, just tell me.”
“Senator, despite my extensive civil experience, including dozens of cases that include contract cases, I have not dealt with the question of what a contract of adhesion is but should it be presented to me, I would–”
“Sure, you’ll look it up,” Kennedy said, clearly unimpressed.
It never ceases to amaze how Joe Biden repeatedly nominates grossly unqualified people to the federal judiciary. He’s long made it clear that he’s more interested in diversity than competence as he strives to make a historic number of “historic” nominations—the first fill-in-the-blank to serve a particular position and whatnot. Earlier this month, a Biden nominee withdrew from consideration after her nomination was held up when she couldn’t even answer Kennedy’s basic questions about the Constitution.
Clearly, Biden didn’t learn from the experience, and I can’t help but wonder when qualifications are even factored in at all in his nomination process, if they are factored in at all after race, gender, and sexual orientation. Why was Meriweather nominated?
Well, it clearly wasn’t because of qualifications.
So, why did he choose her? Well, believe it or not, it wasn’t because she'd be the first woman or first black woman on that court. Meriweather was nominated to fill the vacancy left by Judge Patricia E. Campbell-Smith, a black woman.
Does anyone really believe that Biden didn’t resolve to nominate a black woman to replace a black woman on that court, even if that meant nominating someone who clearly has no business being on that court?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member