Politico Says Obama Will Pick Kagan for Supreme Court

[The Damned]

Source: Slate

Politico's Mike Allen says President Obama will announce his Supreme Court pick Monday and that it will most likely be Solicitor General Elena Kagan. Obama hasn't confirmed anything yet, but "top White House aides will be shocked" if he picks someone else, writes Allen.

Kagan, a long-whispered-about front-runner to replace the spot being vacated by Justice Stevens, is 50, which has always been pushed as a big asset for a lifetime post. In addition, Allen writes that Obama considers the former dean of Harvard Law "to be a persuasive, fearless advocate who would serve as an intellectual counterweight" to the court's conservative wing and perhaps even convince Justice Kennedy to join her in a few decisions.

On Friday, the White House dismissed these rumors as"pure speculation" and said that no decision has been made about a possible pick.



Read more: http://slatest.slate.com/id/2253340/entry/7/

---

Do you smell a Souter?

[howaboutme]

1. I'm shocked

We need a Supreme Court that represents the cultural diversity and true demographics of the USA. I don't see it with Elena Kagan as competent as she might be.

[WileEcoyote]

2. B/S tribalism argument

We need a Supreme Court fighting Corporate person-hood. Forget about what race, ethnicity or religion.

A tired argument that gets us nowhere in a war torn economy. Please find some REAL problems like war and oil spills. Thank you.

[howaboutme]

5. Justice is about cultural diversity

Administering justice fairly is as much a result of diversity in ethnic culture and subjective judgement than political ideology. Tribalism is about protecting the tribe (aka cronyism). When the rubber hits the road decisions must be perceived as fair and based upon law and not based upon common interests. We must demand cultural and ethnic diversity in the SCOTUS.

Every aspect of our lives, from our race, to religion, to education, to geography, to family, to economic status and wealth, forms the basis of our beliefs in justice and judgement. Without diversity, justice will be applied to protect tribal interests. A diverse court that represents diverse demographics minimizes that potential. We need a Supreme Court that represents a true cross section of American diversity and not interests. Tribalism has permeated the USA. We need to see less of it not more of it and Obama's appointment in our diverse nation would not meet that criteria.

[harmonicon]

8. Do you understand what the Supreme Court does?

They aren't some fucking cute advertisement for the law. Do you also want people giving you medical care to be diverse? Sure, it may be nice, but if you were going under the knife, I imagine that you wouldn't give a shit about someone's ethnic background if you knew they were the best surgeon you could possibly get for your procedure. Well, our laws go under the knife at the Supreme Court. I'd rather they don't fuck up the operation than look good while the patient dies on the table.

Or, to put it another way, would you rather have another black justice if they sided with Clarence Thomas, or a justice of any race that actually sided with those who have concern for the people of this country? Having a black justice doesn't mean shit if the decisions they make only serve to further oppress the majority of the country's ethnic minorities.

[WileEcoyote]

11. Hear hear!

Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice both proved that even Black Americans can be as pin headed, ruthless, stupid, self serving and mean as any honky.

Once they made it up the ladder they never once looked back.

I'd take a whole Supreme Court full of Justice Breyers. Whitest of the whites. Least ways if it meant stopping the cocksucking corporations from enslaving all of us.

If only this could clean the corporate slobs in SCOTUS: For whiter whites:

[howaboutme]

13. We have 300+ million people in the USA

Are you claiming we can't find 9 justices who are the best and brightest while generally representing a cross section of the ethnic background of the USA? Right now we have a court that is overwhelmingly overrepresented by those that are ethnically Catholic and Jewish. If they represent your tribe then you probably don't care. If you are Muslim, Protestant, Asian, Buddhist etc then you might feel you are left out and may get screwed especially as a defendant. Even many of us who do not hold or practice religions still retain beliefs and a culture that aligns with our upbringing.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/Religion/post/2010/04/supreme-court-justice-stevens-catholic-jewish/1

[harmonicon]

16. ok, I'll play along for a minute

In terms of race, the court is already fairly representative of the US population (75% white, 15% hispanic, 12% black). However, in terms of gender the court is 7/9 male, compared to the country as a whole which has a slight majority female population. If it's religion that's important to you, over 50% of the country is protestant, which is not represented on the court. Less than 2% is Jewish, which is represented on the court currently. Less than 25% percent of population is Catholic, which is disproportionally represented on the court. Over 16% of the country is non-religious, which is not represented on the court.

How do you suggest we work these things out? No Jews, Muslims, Hindus on the court, because they don't exist in large enough numbers in the population at large? No Asians for the same reason? How do you suggest we square these things off? Should the black person on the court have to be protestant and the hispanic have to be catholic, because those demographics seem to go together? If we start going down that road, it is in fact very difficult to find people to fill seats as they become open - we can't start off with a blank slate and look for the best 9 that would fit. However, if we go by "fixing" the demographic make-up of the court, Obama should only be looking at white protestant women. Would you like that? If he said "I will only consider a white protestant or atheist woman for this seat"? That would scare the shit out of me. I'd like to think that he'd look for the best justice regardless of the demographic make up of the court. Only by doing that can we get to a point where those who judge our laws judge them to ensure equality for all people in the US, opening doors for those who are not represented in government to have the opportunities to work towards being in a position where they could actually realistically have the opportunity to serve on the court.

[minnesota_liberal]

17. Don't forget the mutes

Less than 1% of the country is mute while 11% of SCOTUS is.

[harmonicon]

18. ha! (nt)

[JerseygirlCT]

19. I don't think this country's Protestants have a lot to fear

when it comes to under-representation.

[New Dawn]

15. She is not progressive. She is a terrible pick.

Read Glenn Greenwald's article about her.

[NorthCarolina]

3. Am I surprised? Not.

:puke:

[Jefferson23]

4. Pure speculation, good. I don't want this to be true. n/t

[bluestateguy]

6. Politico can bite me until I hear an official announcement from the White House

My disgust with the MSM is such that I regard the official press releases from the White House as a much more reliable source of news than anything the corporate media produces.

[bemildred]

7. Politico tends to be full of shit. nt

[WatchWhatISay]

14. Especially Mike Allen

Vacuous wanna be

[KoKo]

9. Another Flawed Obama Pick...I wonder why I voted....n/t

[Tx4obama]

12. Need some cheese to go with your whine? Obama has NOT picked anyone yet! n/t

[Tx4obama]

10. A White House aide says NO

From TPM:

President Obama is getting this close to making his Supreme Court selection to fill the vacancy left by the retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens, so we know what that means -- Washington is in a tizzy about when and how and who will be his choice.

Politico's Mike Allen set the Internet aflame this morning by reporting in his Playbook newsletter that the nomination would definitively come on Monday and with a strong suggestion it would be Solicitor General Elena Kagan. Is the report accurate? I asked the White House.

"In a word? No," an aide told me.


Full article here: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/supremely-speculative----scotus-talk-gets-dc-in-a-lather.php?ref=fpb

Why is everyone, all over the internet, reporting on what a REPUBLICAN at Politico is yammering about? ;)

[Odin2005]

20. BOOOOO on Kagan!

[Karenina]

22. Wonder if she's related...

http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kagan_Frederick

[struggle4progress]

21. Politico. Meh.