>
Article snippet: Controversy is swirling over the quality of candidates that MORE is nominating to lifetime appointments on the federal courts. In the last week, the GOP chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has pressed the White House to not proceed with two controversial candidates — including one who had never tried a case in court. A third nominee on Thursday struggled to answer relatively easy questions about basic principles of law during a cringeworthy appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. After learning from his questioning that Matthew Petersen, a nominee for the District Court for the District of Columbia, had not handled a jury trial and had probably taken five or fewer depositions, Kennedy bore down on him, asking Petersen about the last times he’d read either the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Federal Rules of Evidence. Petersen said that as a Federal Election Commission member, he didn’t need to read those federal standards on a “day-to-day basis.” “As a trial judge, you’re obviously going to have witnesses. Can you tell me what the ‘Daubert standard’ is?” Kennedy then asked. “I don’t have that readily at my disposal,” Petersen said of a rule regarding expert testimony in federal court. “Do you know what a 'motion in limine' is?” Kennedy asked a moment later, referring to a request to exclude certain evidence in a trial. Petersen said he hadn’t had time to “do a deep dive,” before later saying that he would “probably not be able to give yo... Link to the full article to read more