Obama's big test of fire (for me, anyway): the Supreme Court

[DFW]

This is one of the few issues I care about even more than why he and his team have
pushed Howard Dean off the edge of their proverbial table, which I care about a LOT.

John Paul Stevens of the Supreme Court is 88 years old. Obama will be the one picking his
replacement. Who he picks will give us an idea of what kind of country he wants us to become.
Bader-Ginsburg and Souter have also been mentioned as potential retirees, and both of them
have been mostly ruling on our side since they joined the court. Their replacements will be
crucial nominations as well. The nomination of competent Justices will certainly pass the
solid Democratic majority in the Senate, so it's in the court of Obama and his team to pick
solid liberal-minded judges with proven competence, and not right-wing hacks like Thomas,
Alito and Roberts. Scalia is an abomination, too, but at least knows something of the law.
That has almost made him more offensive than the other three, who vote blindly as Scalia
wishes them to. Without Scalia, they might have to actually think for themselves. Kennedy's
retirement would even give Obama the chance to undo some of the damage done by Bushes I and II.

If Obama goes the "centrist" route and picks clones of Anthony Kennedy, we are sunk. If, on
the other hand, he picks more like Bader-Ginsburg and Steve Breyer, the country would be on
a fast track to becoming a better place. Less executions, more civil rights laws upheld, and
emphasis on the rights of the individual over those of the state or corporation. The only
ones on the right who would be celebrating would be the dentists treating Scalia, Thomas,
Alito and Roberts for all those gnashed teeth, and that's assuming they even have dentists
who agree with them.

[Youphemism]

1. He should copy Bush's appointment strategy...

...by picking relatively young justices who will remain on the court for awhile.

Yes, this is about the only area in which he should emulate Bush. I'm guilty of shameless sensationalism in my title posting. I hope I didn't get anybody too nervous.

[DFW]

2. No, I figured there had to be a catch! LOL

And you're right, we need Justices who will be there at least as long as
Alito and Roberts. I love Steve Breyer, but he's already 70, and Bader-
Ginsburg is way older.

[cali]

3. I agree. And he's said that he'll appoint justices i n the

Ginsberg/Breyer vein.

[DFW]

4. If he follows through with that, it will be one of his biggest legacies

Just as Alito and Roberts will be two of Bush's worst.

[LiberalFighter]

5. Alito and Roberts will be considered impotent by the time...

Obama ends his 2nd term.

I'm looking at the possibility that 6 maybe 7 with some luck will be appointed.

Most justices retire than die in office.

Justices can retire at age 65 with full pay.

Clarence Thomas is my #7 that might be gone. But he won't be 65 so he will either have to die in office or resign to take a better offer. If there is enough conflict he might be more than willing to resign.

[DFW]

6. Clarence Thomas is one angry and bitter man

He'll stay on and do as much damage as he can as long as there is breath left in him.
I'd hate to see Breyer go, but he'll be 78 at the end of Obama's (presuned) 8 years,
and might retire before then, so as to give Obama the chance to nominate a like-minded
successor. The rest, except for the Bush double trouble and Thomas, will be 80 or
within scratching distance. I think Stevens would have retired long ago were he not the
only Justice standing between preservation of the Republic and Bush's desired dictatorship.

[LiberalFighter]

7. Wouldn't it be sweet if Anita Hill was on the court?

She is 52 right now too. But she probably doesn't have enough of the right experience.

[DFW]

9. How much experience does Thomas need to sleep through hearings? Even I could do that!

I'd love your idea, just to know she would be glaring at him on a daily basis,
but as Obama has set a somewhat higher bar for competence in his appointments
so far, I doubt that Anita Hill would be considered, no matter how great a
poetic justice (no pun intended) it would be. Clarence Thomas wouldn't have
made the second list for law intern for the Idaho Appellate Court if he had
had to meet Obama's standards for professional competence.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

8. Me too. I want them young and liberal.

Bader-Ginsburg should be the mold for future appointees.

Young so that they can serve for a long, long, long time.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Obama provided an insight as to the kind of judges he would select.....

Obama voted AGAINST the Alito and Roberts nominations.

also.....

OBAMA wants to appoint judges empathetic to those being Poor, Old, Gay, Women, Disabled
and minorities.

Speaking at the Planned Parenthood conference in DC this afternoon, Barack Obama leveled harsh words at conservative Supreme Court justices, and he offered his own intention to appoint justices with "empathy." Obama hinted that the court's recent decision in Gonzales v. Carhart -- which upheld a ban on partial-birth abortion -- was part of "a concerted effort to steadily roll back" access to abortions. And he ridiculed Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote that case's majority opinion. "Justice Kennedy knows many things," he declared, "but my understanding is that he does not know how to be a doctor."

Obama also won a laugh at the expense of Chief Justice John Roberts, saying that judgments of Roberts' character during his confirmation hearings were largely superficial. "He loves his wife. He's good to his dog," he joked, adding that judicial philosophy should be weighted more seriously than such evaluations. "We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges."
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/07/17/274143.aspx

--------------------------

Obama opposes Southwick judicial nomination.
WASHINGTON--The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday votes on a very controversial judicial nominee, Leslie Southwick, a former Mississippi state court appeals judge. According to the Alliance for Justice, Southwick is " hostile to worker, consumer and civil rights.''
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/06/obama_to_oppose_southwick_nomi.html

Obama is not scary, just disappointing. Regarding a matter more serious than vegetables -- a judicial confirmation -- he looks like just another liberal on a leash.
<>
Obama, touching all the Democratic nominating electorate's erogenous zones, concocts a tortured statistic about Southwick's "disappointing record on cases involving consumers, employees, racial minorities, women and gays and lesbians. After reviewing his 7,000 opinions, Judge Southwick could not find one case in which he sided with a civil rights plaintiff in a non-unanimous verdict." Surely the pertinent question is whether Southwick sided with the law.

To some of Southwick's opponents, his merits are irrelevant. They simply say that it is unacceptable that only one of the 17 seats on the 5th Circuit is filled with an African American, although 37 percent of Mississippians are black. This "diversity" argument suggests that courts should be considered representative institutions, like legislatures, and that the theory of categorical representation is valid: People of a particular race, ethnicity or gender can only be understood and properly represented by people of the same category.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20070813/ai_n19476124

-----------------------


WASHINGTON -- Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin and Barack Obama of Illinois met Friday with the head of the U.S. Marshals Service to voice frustration over what they call a lack of progress in establishing new safety measures to protect federal judges.
<>
The Illinois senators expressed their concerns Friday to John Clark, the acting director of the U.S. Marshals Service. Clark, who recently had a meeting in Chicago with Lefkow and more than 20 other judges about security issues, vowed to resolve the matter.

Obama said he and Durbin told Clark to give them "an immediate written update" for how and when the security systems would be installed.

Don Hines, a spokesman for the U.S. Marshals Service, said officials would meet with the security company next week. "We expect the installations to begin in the near future," he said.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/051217-senators_press/

[Thrill]

11. I think Stevens will retire as soon as Obama is inaugurated.

[DFW]

13. I'll bet you're right

For him to have held on as long as he has is one show of incredible stamina and
will-power, and I'd bet money on his having stayed on this long only to prevent
Cheneybush from stacking the Court with 50-something right-wing hacks. As far as
I'm concerned, Stevens deserves a statue and some kind of National award of merit
for keeping the SCOTUS away from absolute control by right-wing crazies for another
generation. In the names of my children, I thank him from the bottom of my heart.

[jefferson_dem]

12. True that.

Those are the appointments that deserve extra heavy duty scrutiny. Judicial appointments, especially those to the Supreme Court, will exert controlling influence over American society for generations and, once confirmed, they enjoy absolute independence. I trust Obama will exercise good judgment but i'll be watching closely.

[tigereye]

14. actually some think that Thomas is more of an influence on Scalia than the

other way around - as strange as that may seem.



As far as Kennedy, he treads interesting middle ground at times. Roberts and Alito were groomed and trained to think like Reagan-era non- "activist" jurists. And it's a shame to hear Souter wants to leave, since he is a fascinating liberal justice.

At least we have much more power in the Senate to help support Obama's choices.

[DFW]

15. Our Senate margin is crucial this time

There is no way in the world Obama's picks will be blocked.

It's now up to him what kind of people he will pick. I hope
he picks 50-ish, brilliant, progressive thinkers, just in
case the Republicans figure out a way in 2016 to do a repeat
performance of 2000. You can't say they don't learn from their
mistakes. Otherwise, we'd be celebrating the end of a great 8
years of the Gore Presidency.