Judicial vetting works

The Boston Herald: Few institutions are as critical to a well-functioning democracy as an independent judiciary. And so at the federal level the job comes with life tenure.

While there is a kind of to-the-victor-belong-the-spoils element to judicial nominations, it is also crucial that such appointments are first rate – regardless of a nominee’s ideological bent – especially at the district court level, where experience is important.

In the past week three potential judicial clunkers put forward by the Trump administration have been withdrawn – and the nation is better for that.

The most visible, public humiliation was that of Matthew Petersen, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who was whittled down to size by U.S. Sen. John Neely Kennedy, R-La., in what became a viral video of Petersen failing to answer any of Kennedy’s questions about his knowledge of the law.

That Petersen was a former colleague on the Federal Election Commission of White House counsel Don McGahn seemed to be his chief qualification.

“I had hoped my nearly two decades of public service might carry more weight than my two worst minutes on television,” Petersen wrote in a letter to Trump, asking that his nomination be withdrawn.