Bench experience not mandatory to be good judge

Jerry Willick, Las Vegas

Friday, May 21, 2010 | 2:01 a.m.

Regarding Harvey Talbert’s Tuesday letter to the editor, headlined “Kagan lacks right experience:”

Talbert asks: Of all the possible, very experienced judges in America’s judicial system, why pick someone for the U.S. Supreme Court with no bench time at all?

The question has merit, but in reality a person who knows the Constitution and law far outweighs “bench experience” in my opinion.

There are judges sitting in courts in Las Vegas (and I’m sure everywhere else) who aren’t the least bit qualified to be judges. They often are voted in by name recognition or total guesswork by the electorate who haven’t a clue as to their ability.

As for Talbert’s example — Are you going to pick a skilled and experienced surgeon, or an eminently qualified teacher to be a replacement doctor at the major cardiac intensive care hospital? — I want a doctor who has the most knowledge about my operation more than a hack who has been doing it for years.

Some of our most revered justices had no bench experience.