Candidate: I am concerned that few judges who arbitrate cases involving high-tech companies have any relevant background; indeed, not one federal judge has a degree or any experience in computer technology. Until our judges are better able to demonstrate an understanding of the technology involved in these cases, we should view any decisions they pass down with skepticism.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the candidate's argument?

(A) Litigation and jurisprudence in this area concerns the moral and social value of scientific and technological developments, judgments which do not intrinsically require a sophisticated technical understanding of the material.

(B) Computer scientists, by and large, have little interest in politics and public policy. It would be difficult to find scientists with the degree of commitment required for a serious contribution to the judicial system.

(C) There is a lack of people who are qualified in both technical and legal areas of expertise.

(D) There is very little opportunity, and indeed little need, for technical experts in the judicial branch. There is therefore almost no way for a technical specialist to rise through the ranks to a top-level position in government.

(E) The rewards of a life as a judge, in terms of both money and prestige, are not high enough to attract top-flight technical experts to this area.