muahaha!
Yeah. I heard this last night. Interesting. Won’t really change the composition of the court, though.
bush screwed up on that one.
So?
A crypto-liberal Justice retires, and will be replaced by an overtly liberal Justice.
Maybe.
I read an interesting piece in the New York Times today, which suggested nobody should be surprised if Obama, who is at heart a legal pragmatist, fills Souter’s vacant seat with a relatively moderate judge:
[i]“[Obama’s] nominee will not create the proverbial shock and awe,” said Charles J. Ogletree, a Harvard professor who has known the president since his days as a student.
Mr. Obama believes the court must never get too far ahead of or behind public sentiment, they say. He may have a mandate for change, and Senate confirmation odds in his favor. But he has almost always disappointed those who expected someone in his position – he was Harvard’s first black law review president and one of the few minority members of the University of Chicago’s law faculty – to side consistently with liberals.[/i]
The Times is a pretty liberal rag, so it’s hard to guess how their editors would define “moderate.” I’m waiting to hear the nominee’s views on the Court’s DC v Heller decision (which Souter dissented, by the way) before getting too agitated one way or the other.
Mr. Obama believes the court must never get too far ahead of or behind public sentiment,
This is precisely the problem. Picking some fucking constitutional illiterate that even ponders public sentiment when deciding on a case. If their judgement has anything to do with public sentiment, whether it is far ahead or far behind is of little consequense.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
So?
A crypto-liberal Justice retires, and will be replaced by an overtly liberal Justice.
Maybe.
I read an interesting piece in the New York Times today, which suggested nobody should be surprised if Obama, who is at heart a legal pragmatist, fills Souter’s vacant seat with a relatively moderate judge:
[i]“[Obama’s] nominee will not create the proverbial shock and awe,” said Charles J. Ogletree, a Harvard professor who has known the president since his days as a student.
Mr. Obama believes the court must never get too far ahead of or behind public sentiment, they say. He may have a mandate for change, and Senate confirmation odds in his favor. But he has almost always disappointed those who expected someone in his position – he was Harvard’s first black law review president and one of the few minority members of the University of Chicago’s law faculty – to side consistently with liberals.[/i]
The Times is a pretty liberal rag, so it’s hard to guess how their editors would define “moderate.” I’m waiting to hear the nominee’s views on the Court’s DC v Heller decision (which Souter dissented, by the way) before getting too agitated one way or the other.[/quote]
It’s been a couple of days since I read that article, but did you notice how all of the prospective jurists were women?
Not really politically relevant, but the place that Souter is expected to retire to provides some insight into his quirkiness. It’s expected he’ll retire to his boyhood home in the rural NH town of Weare (pronounced “where”). According to the Washington Post, Souter is the wealthiest justice with an estimated net worth between $6 and $30 million.
I wonder if it is more than coincidence that Souter waited to announce his retirement until after Bush left office.
Supreme Court judges are among the most powerful people in the country, and the timing of their appointment can make an enormous difference.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Supreme Court judges are among the most powerful people in the country, and the timing of their appointment can make an enormous difference.[/quote]
I completely disagree with this.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
forlife wrote:
Supreme Court judges are among the most powerful people in the country, and the timing of their appointment can make an enormous difference.
I completely disagree with this. [/quote]
You cannot be serious.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
forlife wrote:
Supreme Court judges are among the most powerful people in the country, and the timing of their appointment can make an enormous difference.
I completely disagree with this.
You cannot be serious.[/quote]
No YOU cannot be serious.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
forlife wrote:
Supreme Court judges are among the most powerful people in the country, and the timing of their appointment can make an enormous difference.
I completely disagree with this.
I completely disagree with this, i.e., that you completely disagree.[/quote]
I completely disagree that you disagree that I disagree with this!
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
So?
A crypto-liberal Justice retires, and will be replaced by an overtly liberal Justice.
Maybe.
I read an interesting piece in the New York Times today, which suggested nobody should be surprised if Obama, who is at heart a legal pragmatist, fills Souter’s vacant seat with a relatively moderate judge:
[i]“[Obama’s] nominee will not create the proverbial shock and awe,” said Charles J. Ogletree, a Harvard professor who has known the president since his days as a student.
Mr. Obama believes the court must never get too far ahead of or behind public sentiment, they say. He may have a mandate for change, and Senate confirmation odds in his favor. But he has almost always disappointed those who expected someone in his position – he was Harvard’s first black law review president and one of the few minority members of the University of Chicago’s law faculty – to side consistently with liberals.[/i]
The Times is a pretty liberal rag, so it’s hard to guess how their editors would define “moderate.” I’m waiting to hear the nominee’s views on the Court’s DC v Heller decision (which Souter dissented, by the way) before getting too agitated one way or the other.[/quote]
Yup.
Obama is entertaining the idea of picking someone that has no judicial experience at all? What the fuck, I know it’s not required, but one would think having some experience would be needed.