I gotta admit that I am not really qualified to offer my opinion on Supreme Court candidates. I don’t really plan on being very opinionated about whomever Obama picks to replace Justice Souter. I could change my mind if there are parts of their record that I find appalling, but I discount the possibility of that happening. I’m pretty open-minded. I’d probably be enthusiastic about a totally off-the-wall pick like Bruce Springsteen. I definitely see the merits of picking a woman and it would also be nice to see someone who represents a minority community. I don’t have much preference for someone that is already a sitting judge, although it would obviously be a problem if Obama picked someone stupid with no ability to quickly pick-up the fine points of Constitutional Law. Anyone halfway bright would have the remainder of their lifetime to master the issues and could easily become a competent judge. They have plenty of staff.
I guess what I am saying is that I am not an ideologue about the Court. As long as I know that the nominee isn’t going to side with Alito and Scalia, I am willing to give a wide berth to any nominee and I have no preference that they be especially qualified in the conventional sense. If anything, I have a slight preference for an unconventional pick that will bring a non-legal experience to the bench. If you look at the Court’s history from a long enough telescope, this isn’t that radical a view to take.
The only qualm I have about picking an outside-the-box nominee is that there are so few opportunities to get on the court and so many people have crossed all the t’s and dotted all the i’s that it would seem an injustice to pass them all over for someone who hasn’t made it their life’s mission to serve on the Supreme Court. But that’s also the allure of the unconventional pick. We have all these candidates that we can’t really trust because their every move since law school has been orchestrated to make them a viable candidate. They are phony balonies to one degree or another.
One of the main reasons I am so apathetic about the pick is that I know the choice isn’t going to change the makeup of the court. Even if the nominee is radically to the left of Souter, it’s unlikely that they will sway any other Justice to follow their lead. In almost every case, the decisions will be decided the same way as if Souter were still on the court. And, if the nominee has some special powers to persuade Justice Kennedy to their side, that isn’t something I am going to be able to know in advance.
Because this pick is so seemingly inconsequential, I have a hard time understanding the position of conservatives that want the nominee filibustered at all costs. Replacing one pro-choice justice with another means little. But setting a precedent that it is appropriate to use a litmus test on judges can only come back to bite Republicans in the ass.
