Amended Opinions: Maureen Mahoney IS Interested

... in serving on the Supreme Court, contrary to prior speculation from Article III Groupie.

[In case you're wondering, yes, A3G drafted most of this post prior to the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court yesterday. So this post has been largely overtaken by events. But since it's a quasi-correction, A3G will run just to set the record straight, even though the world is now much less interested in Maureen E. Mahoney than it was before Monday morning.]

According to a credible source, "Maureen is definitely interested in SCOTUS, but thinks (rightly) that’s she’s being blackballed by the conservatives." Based on some of the hostility towards her that can be seen over at Confirm Them -- including the call for Mahoney to "serve some serious time" on a federal appeals court, atoning for Grutter -- it's hard to disagree with that conclusion.

As to why Maureen Mahoney turned down the chance to be appointed to a circuit court, even though she would love to serve on the Supreme Court, speculation abounds. According to one UTR source, "she really, really loves her job at [Latham & Watkins]. But there are jobs, and then there are JOBS..." According to another reader, Mahoney "was approached and asked whether she wanted a COA gig. [O]ne of the reasons that she rejected it was that the court was not going to be D.C. or 4th.... Note that G.H.W.B. nominated her to the E.D. Va. way back when, and she would have taken that spot if she had been confirmed."

In the week before President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers, Maureen Mahoney -- a.k.a. "the female John Roberts" -- was generating significant buzz in the mainstream media and in the blogosphere as a possible SCOTUS candidate. See, e.g., ACSBlog; Captain's Quarters; Confidential Report; The Left Coaster. Commentators had lots of nice things to say about her impressive credentials. But, just as Chief Justice Roberts makes mistakes, Mahoney also isn't perfect, at least according to this UTR reader:

[Recently we] watched a cheaply produced video on appellate advocacy in my legal writing class. The video starred Maureen Mahoney and Brett Kavanaugh (and was produced at least 10 years ago I believe). Unfortunately I do not recall the title or the topic discussed. [Update: Please see the comments; there is some disagreement concerning the identity of Mahoney's adversary.]

What I do remember is that almost everyone in the class agreed that Kavanaugh was clearly a much better speaker and much more persuasive than Mahoney.... Perhaps it was a bad day for Mahoney, or perhaps Kavanaugh is just a superstar [A3G: he is], but I think based on that video there must be many female candidates much more deserving of the spot (at least if you are aiming to pick a “female Judge Roberts”).

A3G is intrigued to learn of some ancient videotape that fails to display the brilliant Maureen Mahoney to her best advantage. Today Mahoney is a legal celebrity, an A-list Supreme Court advocate with a stellar reputation. And yet, somewhere out there in the ether, a ten-year-old, "cheaply produced" video captures her engaging in... subpar oral advocacy. This whole incident reminds A3G of how, once a Hollywood actress starts hitting the big time, some awful soft-core porn video from the starlet's "ramen-noodle days" inevitably resurfaces, usually at a most inconvenient time for her burgeoning career -- when she's about to land her first leading role in a blockbuster movie, or her first Vanity Fair cover.

At 50, Maureen Mahoney is still young enough to be nominated to the Supreme Court if a vacancy materializes in the next ten years, which surely will happen (and sooner than one might expect if Harriet Miers isn't confirmed). So A3G has two pieces of advice for Ms. Mahoney: (1) hie thee to a circuit court, to start building a solid track record on the bench, and (2) find and destroy all copies of this incriminating videotape, as soon as possible!!!

Comments

[S Pi]

If it's the video I think it is (the one about an airline), Starr is on the bench, and Roberts is the advocate on the other side.

[Mike]

More love for Mahoney:

"Beyond former solicitors general, clerks reported that the amicus briefs authored by certain, established Supreme Court advocates in private practice would be given more consideration than the typical amicus brief. Among the names listed were ... Maureen Mahoney." Kelly J. Lynch, Best Friends? Supreme Court Law Clerks on Effective Amicus Curiae Briefs, 20 J.L. & Pol. 33, 55.

[re]

Actually, I think the advocate on the other side was John Roberts. Ken Starr was on the bench. And Mahoney definitely holds her own in that video. Clearly, someone needs to find a copy to figure out the cast. Because memories from 1L fade so fast.

[J]

I'm pretty sure the guy in that video was Jeffrey Sutton, not Kavanaugh. I remember having to watch it in legal practice 1-L year.