Replacement for Justice Souter - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Honus · #1 05-01-2009, 10:35 AM

Of all the people I've heard mentioned as candidates for Justice Souter's seat on the Supreme Court, two potential nominees share certain qualities that give them an advantage over the other candidates: Hillary Clinton and Harold Koh.

The qualities they share that make them strong candidates are (a) they have the education and intellect for the job and (b) either would make GOP heads explode. Two great qualities, IMHO.

Fitz · #2 05-01-2009, 10:43 AM

I've heard that it's got to be an Hispanic woman in order to keep the diversity universe in harmony.

Honus · #3 05-01-2009, 10:45 AM

All else being equal, an Hispanic woman would be good.

Honus · #4 05-01-2009, 10:51 AM

Here's what Obama said during the campaign:

Quote:

Obama’s Qualifications: Someone Like Souter, Believes In ‘Right To Privacy,’ Empathizes With The Powerless

Associate Supreme Court Justice David Souter "plans to retire at the end of the term in June." The Wall Street Journal explained Souter's legacy, writing, "Justice Souter was no liberal trailblazer," but in recent years, aligned with the more liberal Justices on the most divisive issues including executive power, capital punishment, and race. While speculation is rampant about who Obama will name as Souter's replacement, a more productive question at this stage is what attributes Obama will look for in a jurist.

From his time in the Senate and statements during the Democratic primary, Obama appears committed to nominating someone who recognizes that the Constitution provides Americans with an inherent right to privacy, someone who can empathize with the "less powerful," and perhaps someone who understands "what it means to be on the outside." Watch Obama explaining his ideal nominee during the Democratic Primary: [go to link below for video]

Obama's statements echoed his earlier opposition to Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.

More recently, during the 2008 general election campaign Obama struck a slightly more conservative tone by warning that the "activism" of the Warren Court, which played a significant role in expanding civil rights and liberties in 1950s and 1960s, would not be appropriate today. He told the Detroit Free Press in October 2008 that he would look to nominate judges who took after Souter or Justice Stephen Breyer:

Q: "[W]hat justices would you use as models for your pick?"

OBAMA: "Well, it depends on how far you go back. I mean, Justice (John) Marshall was pretty good. Warren himself, Brennan, (Thurgood) Marshall. But that doesn't necessarily mean that I think their judicial philosophy is appropriate for today. ... In fact, I would be troubled if you had that same kind of activism in circumstances today. [...]

I think that Justice Souter, who was a Republican appointee, Justice Breyer, a Democratic appointee, are very sensible judges. They take a look at the facts and they try to figure out: How does the Constitution apply to these facts? They believe in fidelity to the text of the Constitution, but they also think you have to look at what is going on around you and not just ignore real life."

Several weeks later, Obama said in a debate with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) that he "will look for those judges who have an outstanding judicial record, who have the intellect, and who hopefully have a sense of what real-world folks are going through." Using the example of Lilly Ledbetter, Obama elaborated:

OBAMA: "For years, she had been getting paid less than a man had been paid for doing the exact same job. And when she brought a suit, saying equal pay for equal work, the judges said, well, you know, it's taken you too long to bring this lawsuit, even though she didn't know about it until fairly recently.

I think that it's important for judges to understand that if a woman is out there trying to raise a family, trying to support her family, and is being treated unfairly, then the court has to stand up, if nobody else will. And that's the kind of judge that I want."

Conservatives will likely take issue with anyone that Obama nominates. Even before Obama was sworn in, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) declared that he planned to filibuster any Obama Supreme Court nominee that he viewed as "too liberal."

Media Matters Action Network asks if Republicans in Congress will "remain consistent" with their 2005 position that filibustering judicial nominees is unconstitutional.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/01/obama-souter-replacement/

As usual, BHO hit the nail on the head.

Txjake · #5 05-01-2009, 11:11 AM

Hillary?

I am not a Republican, but I cannot imagine a WORSE choice for the Supremes, except perhaps Angela Davis, or that terrorist that mentored Obama.

Medmech · #6 05-01-2009, 11:16 AM

How about simply appointing a person that is best suited for the job?

Honus · #7 05-01-2009, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Medmech

How about simply appointing a person that is best suited for the job?

That's what we need to do. I was kidding about the exploding head part.

Honus · #8 05-01-2009, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Txjake

Hillary?

I am not a Republican, but I cannot imagine a WORSE choice for the Supremes, except perhaps Angela Davis, or that terrorist that mentored Obama.

You see Hillary as a leftist?

cmbdiesel · #9 05-01-2009, 11:30 AM

How about nominating dculkin?

Although it would probably not leave much time for OD, we could debate some real cutting edge issues then.

Txjake · #10 05-01-2009, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

You see Hillary as a leftist?

you don't? are you joking? she and Bill, esp she espouses all that was wrong with the 60s East Coast college radical crowd. She is just gussied up in a more presentable package. she is about as relevant as that moron Al Franken....

JollyRoger · #11 05-01-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Of all the people I've heard mentioned as candidates for Justice Souter's seat on the Supreme Court, two potential nominees share certain qualities that give them an advantage over the other candidates: Hillary Clinton and Harold Koh.

The qualities they share that make them strong candidates are (a) they have the education and intellect for the job and (b) either would make GOP heads explode. Two great qualities, IMHO.

I want Al Franken to get the job.

#12 05-01-2009, 12:12 PM

You can agree with Al Franken's political views or not but either way he is a very intelligent person.

Honus · #13 05-01-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

How about nominating dculkin?

...

Honus · #14 05-01-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Txjake

you don't? are you joking?...

No, I don't, and no, I am not.

Her attempt at health care reform in the early 90s was kind of lefty, but I am not aware of anything else in her record during the last 30 years that supports your view.

If she's such a lefty, why did she vote to authorize force in Iraq?

Honus · #15 05-01-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Txjake

...moron Al Franken....

Moron? What an odd thing to say. Of all the things Franken is, moron is not one of them.