The U.S. Supreme Court

lol malkin and her "legal sources" http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/01/obamas-choices-gird-your-loins/

Okay so for a trifecta we need one more old-line GOP-affiliated government person to make a decision that causes most everyone to go WTF with a last name that starts with S and ends with 'er'

-It is also unclear that a Justice Kagan would be an adequately independent check on executive excesses. She has argued in favor of greatly enhanced presidential control over the bureaucracy, which is concerning in light of President Obama’s unprecedented centralization of power in the White House.

o_O

Anything to keep themselves happy.

ok lololololol at Kagan on the Supreme Court

JUSTICE HI DERE

I mean, I have heard from RELIABLE SOURCES that it's something she desperately wants, but I'm categorically opposed to that for the exact same reason I was categorically opposed to Harriet Miers; you should have served as a judge if you're going to be on the Supreme Court.

. . .or at least argued a case in front of the Supreme Court

As Legal Times reported in January, the selection of experienced appellate litigators for the position of solicitor general is a relatively recent phenomenon that parallels specialization at the Court generally. Past solicitors general who had not argued before the Court until after their selection include Robert Bork, Wade McCree, and Kenneth Starr.

i meant for someone who is old and has cancer and people expect to retire

neither cancer nor age nor the possibility of retirement necessarily make someone weak of mind.

you should have served as a judge if you're going to be on the Supreme Court

there are lots of smart people, lawyers included, who disagree

wow i didn't know thanks xp

don't assume for a second this is going to be status quo OR a move to the lib side

You can't assume anything about Supreme Court justices. Look at Souter himself.

there are lots of smart people, lawyers included, who disagree

Which is fine. I still have my opinion.

I don't think Douglas had experience as a judge.

Is Souter really that liberal? Or just liberal in terms of the composition of this particular court?

The latter. Stevens isn't a liberal either.

In that NYT magazine profile of Stevens a couple of years ago, he got miffed when he was called a liberal.

Souter is not that liberal for a gay justice.

Oh you went there etc.

well, not every man can fill his robe etc.

basically, the "liberal" side has been intellectually vacant since Brennan retired.

most gay guys would rather live in rural NH than DC

There's more bears in DC though.

not esp friendly bears, in my experience. and otters w/ cologne.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/05/01/sotomayor_the_front-runner.html

Your 2008 Obama Cabinet/Appointments Speculation Thread

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22106.html

if barry wants to start a civil war, then sure why not.

he'll get to it right after he holds somebody accountable for torture

that would be awesome, not only a woman but a gay???

not only a gay but a WOMAN

yeah so not gonna happen
but i would like leah ward sears--not only a woman but a black or vice versa

Lisa Coleman for Supreme Court Justice. The movement begins HERE.

not a gay, not yet a woman

justice queen latifah

she can rule in my jurisdiction

It's really more important to have the justice that can make the best argument for gay rights than to have a justice that is gay. If a non-gay justice supports gay rights but makes better constitutional arguments for gay rights, that's the better choice.

I mean Scalia isn't good for the right because he's conservative, he's good for the right because he can make conservative arguments that have at least a superficial appearance of soundness, sureness and clarity with regard to the Constitution.

Plus he's gay

lol

umm I don't know how well "gay" and "conservative" equate - the value of having an underrepresented minority on the court seems clear

id say conservatives are pretty gay

umm I don't know how well "gay" and "conservative" equate - the value of having an underrepresented minority on the court seems clear

Look at how great Clarence Thomas has been!

Thomas was an inspired choice, in purely political terms. As a justice he is, of course, a joke in very poor taste, but a joke who votes exactly as he was intended to vote. Given the ridicule he invites on himself and so obviously grimly endures, it is a wonder that he doesn't go on a killing spree.

What kind of ridicule does he endure?

I'm reading Supreme Conflict at the moment, and I've underestimated Thomas' influence on the court, especially on Scalia, whom he's been accused of aping (when the evidence shows that Thomas swayed Scalia in the early days).

i'm sure every lawyer in the SCOTUS bar has a million jokes about him, he's ridiculed in the press all the time for not asking questions during oral argument and for having an RV and just being a total weirdo, plus he's considered the poorest writer on the court.

he's ridiculed in the press all the time for not asking questions during oral argument and for having an RV and just being a total weirdo

Rehnquist, Roberts, and Ginsburg all say he asks sharp questions in conference. He's a weirdo, sure (and a really angry one too), but I'm not going so far as to call him an embarrassment or hack because I don't agree with his jurisprudence.

“I have to admit,” he said, “that I’m one of those people that still thinks the dishwasher is a miracle. What a device! And I have to admit that because I think that way, I like to load it. I like to look in and see how the dishes were magically cleaned.”

closing thread. Go here:

U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Nino Edition