Supreme Court May Soon Lack Protestant Justices

[oberliner]

Source: NPR

With U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens talking openly about retirement, attention has focused on the "who" — as in who is on President Obama's short list of potential nominees. But almost nobody has noticed that when Justice Stevens retires, it is entirely possible that there will be no Protestant justices on the court for the first time ever.

Topic With A Hint Of Taboo

Let's face it: This is a radioactive subject. As Jeff Shesol, author of the critically acclaimed new book Supreme Power, puts it, "religion is the third rail of Supreme Court politics. It's not something that's talked about in polite company." And although Shesol notes that privately a lot of people remark about the surprising fact that there are so many Catholics on the Supreme Court, this is not a subject that people openly discuss.

In fact, six of the nine justices on the current court are Roman Catholic. That's half of the 12 Catholics who have ever served on the court. Only seven Jews have ever served, and two of them are there now. Depending on the Stevens replacement, there may be no Protestants left on the court at all in a majority Protestant nation where, for decades and generations, all of the justices were Protestant.

The first Catholic to serve was Chief Justice Roger Taney, historically famous for writing the Dred Scott decision upholding slavery. After he left, no Catholic was appointed for 30 years. But by the early 20th century, the nation settled into a pattern in which there was one seat on the court occupied by a Catholic, and usually one by a Jew, beginning with Louis Brandeis in 1916. There was no Jewish justice, however, in the 24 years between 1969 and 1993. The 20th century hiatus for Jews began under President Nixon, who, when asked by his attorney general when he was going to fill the Jewish seat, replied, "Well, how about after I die."

Read more: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125641988

[DavidDvorkin]

1. I demand an atheist justice!

Or at least someone without any declared belief. Such people make up 15% of the population, so we should have one SC justice from our group.

Or perhaps it would be best not to start this ball rolling at all.

[connecticut yankee]

46. How about a Unitarian

like Oliver Wendell Holmes?

[DavidDvorkin]

48. That would be an improvement over the current situation.

[ehrnst]

56. They would just keep saying, "I can see your point" to everyone. ; )

I speak as a UU...

[boppers]

63. Perhaps a committee to discuss the issue would help.

;)

[LiberalFighter]

47. I would go for a Protestant that goes Atheist.

To increase the odds that they lean more Atheist I would prefer a younger nomination.

Oh! And probably not from the South.

[Betty Karlson]

57. And why deny me even one person of my faith in the SC?

Just asking.

[DavidDvorkin]

62. There are only 7 justices in the SC

so obviously not everyone can be represented. It takes 15% of the population to earn one justice.

[Cronus Protagonist]

2. We need a Buddhist

Could we draft Tiger, or is he too Republican?

[Captain Hilts]

3. All the Catholics are right-wing crank Catholics. nt

[caraher]

16. Sotomayor is a RW crank???

[Captain Hilts]

18. I stand corrected! nt

[Tx4obama]

22. The current SCOTUS

In order of seniority:

Roberts - Roman Catholic
Stevens - Protestant
Scalia - Roman Catholic
Kennedy - Roman Catholic
Thomas - Roman Catholic
Ginsburg - Jewish
Breyer - Jewish
Alito - Roman Catholic
Sotomayor - Roman Catholic

[ElsewheresDaughter]

31. Phillip and Daniel Berrigan proves you wrong! Oh, as does Thomas Merton and Dororthy Day, JFK, RFK

[Demeter]

4. Quick! Appoint some Legal eagle atheists!

I cannot adequately express my contempt for these "Catholic" Supremes, because what they REALLY are is the spear point of Fascism. There's nothing of the Christ or St. Francis and everything of St. Dominick, founder of the Inquisition, and his boss, Innocent III, about them. They have no intention of ensuring separation of Church from State.

[xchrom]

5. Someday -- and I think this will be unfortunately true -

There will be a supreme with a degree from
liberty u.

[HillbillyBob]

19. LIke the 200 or 300 seats filled by amBushco

in legal and justice positions all over the place that were from Liberty and Regents Universities?

[24601]

6. Well, I could do it, except for law school and all that legal stuff.... n/t

[Jefferson23]

8. lol, good one. n/t

[RC]

9. I don't think you need to be a lawyer to be on the Supreme Court.

Because the Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, the President may nominate anyone to serve. However, that person must receive the confirmation of the Senate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States

[oberliner]

11. Has there ever been one?

A non-lawyer on the Supreme Court, that is.

[SharonAnn]

12. Yes, at least one. Former governor? Maybe Brennan?

[Jim Lane]

20. Brennan was most assuredly a lawyer

From :

Brennan attended Harvard Law School, where he was a member of the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau.<3> He graduated in 1931 and entered private practice in his home state of New Jersey, where he practiced labor law at the firm of Pitney Hardin (which would later become Day Pitney).<4> He entered the Army as a major in March 1942, and left as a Colonel in 1945. He did legal work for the ordnance division. In 1949, Brennan was appointed to the Superior Court (a trial court) by Governor of New Jersey Alfred E. Driscoll. In 1951, Driscoll appointed him to the New Jersey Supreme Court.

He was then appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1956. He was never a state governor.

As for a former governor, the only one that came immediately to my mind was Earl Warren. He was certainly better known as a politician than as a lawyer, and unlike Brennan he had no judicial experience before joining the Court, but he was a lawyer. He received his law degree from Boalt Hall (U. Cal. Berkeley), worked in various legal jobs (most notably as a county DA), and was elected Attorney General of California.

[onenote]

44. no. every scotus justice has been a lawyer

[colinmom71]

33. No...

All 111 Supreme Court justices have been practicing lawyers and/or bar members at some point in their lives.

[rpannier]

34. You don't have to have been a graduate opf Law School to sit on the Court

No where does it state that a Supreme Court Justice have a Law Degree

38 Justices Never went to Law School

James F. Byrnes (1941-1942) never attended high school, college, or law school.

Stanley Forman Reed (1938-1957) was the last person to serve without a law degree (although he did attend law school for awhile).

[onenote]

45. correct. but all of those mentioned were in fact members of the bar

It was not uncommon, up until the second half of the 20th century, for individuals to become lawyers without actually attending law school. "Reading for the bar" or "apprenticing" were other routes to becoming admitted to the practice of law.

[CTyankee]

7. I demand equal opportunity for Unitarians!

Good enough for Thomas Jefferson...

[Solly Mack]

10. k/r

[Atman]

13. Good.

Why do I give a shit? Why should ANY religious stance have an impact on MY life? I don't give a fuck if there are no Catholics, no Protestants, no Jews, no Buddhists, no nothin' on the SCOTUS. How about just a bunch of well-educated men and women who don't rely on floating ghosts, mythology and hokum to guide their judgment? Is that too much to ask?

[thesquanderer]

14. I think it's a pretty safe bet that Obama won't appoint a Muslim, though (n/t)

[Xenotime]

23. Why not?!? It would help with the world's view of america.

[rpannier]

36. Because the republicans and Republicrats

would filibuster it

[thesquanderer]

52. maybe, but the bigger problem is...

... Obama has needed to fight the perception that he is Muslim, or sympathizes with Muslims, which unfortunately, is a political liability, whose fires I'm sure he does not wish to stoke. So he's not going to appoint a Muslim.

[thesquanderer]

53. Helping the world's view of America...

...is not a goal of Supreme Court appointments,. Any such benefit would be a bonus. At home, nominating a Muslim would be a major political liability.

[BrklynLiberal]

15. I don't care about the religion as much as I do about the fact that so many were

appointed by repukes..

[Tx4obama]

25. The Justices

Currently:

Roberts - appointed by Bush
Stevens - appointed by Ford
Scalia - appointed by Reagan
Kennedy - appointed by Reagan
Thomas - appointed by G.H.W. Bush
Ginsburg - appointed by Clinton
Breyer - Clinton
Alito - Bush
Sotomayor - Obama

So, if Obama appoints/replaces TWO more (previously appt'ed by repubs) then we'll have the majority (five) appointed by our guys :)

Btw: The last democratic appointed CHIEF JUSTICE was Frederick Moore Vinson (appointed by Harry S. Truman). Vinson died while still serving in 1953. That was 57 years ago!

[BrklynLiberal]

54. Wow! The Chief Justice info is jaw-dropping!!!

I sure hope that one of the Bush, 41 or 43, appointees is the next one to be superceded by an Obama appointee.
Ginsburg has been looking pretty frail, but I hope she fools them all and hangs in there..

[UTUSN]

17. K&R #7 for, "NObody expects the Spanish Inquisition!1

Our chief weapons are FEAR and SURPRISE!1"



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uprjmoSMJ-o

[rpannier]

37. I certainly didn't

But they did get my pizza delivered in less than 30 minutes

[Rozlee]

21. Why can't someone from my church be a Justice?

I belong to Rozlee's Church. 12% tithe. Molesting boys begins after 17 years of age. With a few exceptions for Abercrombie and Fitch models.

[chollybocker]

32. Does Mark Foley belong to your church?

And more importantly, does he have a law degree? ;)

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[David__77]

26. How about an atheist?

We are unrepresented!

[Mosaic]

27. For Good Reason

There is good reason why this is reflected in the Supreme Court and American culture in general. Protestants are in fact a shrinking minority at this point, see attached article.

http://www2.norc.org/about/press07202004.asp

[MellowDem]

59. They're still the majority...

and Mainline Protestantism fading isn't a good thing, since we only will have evangelicals left and hardcore Catholics. There is no real "good" reason for there being no Protestants on the Supreme Court, but I don't think it's an incredibly important thing either. A lot of the Catholics probably don't even follow religion, just like many Jews are more Jewish in culture than beliefs. As long as we get more sane people on the Court, I'm all for it.

[XemaSab]

28. This is fascinating

n/t

[elleng]

29. WHAT A HEADLINE!

I HATE this!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

30. Nothing wrong with a Jesuit education. It is one of the best educations one can get.....

My daughter is going to Boston College next fall and I am pleased with her choice.

[boppers]

35. Article VI, section 3.

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Its a touchy topic because it's blatantly unconstitutional to consider it.

[LuckyLib]

38. After thousands of white male Protestants in power over the years, I'd be happy to see them

absent from the Supreme Court for awhile. A bit more diversity would help. And a female majority.

[Hardrada]

39. As an actual White Male Protestant (Lutheran)

I can say we are going away probably for keeps since this is becoming a world for everyone else and one which we care little about and would gladly relinquish.

[MellowDem]

60. Well, they're absent...

and look what we get. Guess you got your wish. Protestants aren't the problem. Hell, white males aren't the problem. It's conservatism. So I'll take your female black conservative and take a liberal white protestant male any day of the week including Sunday.

[notadmblnd]

40. It would be nice to have a judge with no religion

[MellowDem]

61. We probably have had many...

and currently do as well. Labels don't equal beliefs

[Rage Inc.]

41. the horror, the horror

[diane in sf]

42. I'd like to see some animists, Buddhists, atheists and Universal Unitarians appointed

[Delphinus]

43. About time for

a Unitarian Universalist. I think I've read that at least one or two of our founding fathers were of the Unitarian or Universalist belief.

Or an Atheist.

Or an Agnostic.

Or a Pagan.

Or a Wiccan.

Or a Buddhist.

Or a Taoist.

Anybody but a Christian or a Jew, who have been well-represented over the years. Time for the rest of us to have a representative up there.

[LiberalFighter]

49. Make one of them an honorary Protestant.

Have Stevens confer the honor on maybe Scalia and then he should alert the media what he did.

[snooper2]

50. And big fucking deal...they spent time writing an article on this

:rofl:

[mulsh]

51. the plot worked. soon, perhaps within our lifetime the country will

finally be delivered to the Vatican. A few well placed devout Catholics, the kind that really scare most other Catholics, can do amazing things give faith and time.
:sarcasm:

AS a former Catholic I must say the venom of anit catholic rhetoric on this forum never ceases to impress me. Its weird being even slightly on the defense of a religion I don't particularly agree with.

I have nothing good to say about justices Thomas through Alito on the court but it has everything to do with their judicial record and nothing to do with the kind of church they attend.

[treestar]

58. Irrelevant, they must apply the law

They have no right to bring personal religion into it.