So, who do want to see Obama nominate to the Supreme Court? Someone conventional? A particular judge? A governor or former senator? Someone from academia or the business world?
I’m kind of hoping it is someone I’ve never heard of. But I like Diane Wood from among the names that I’ve seen floated around.
Brian Leiter has a pretty convincing argument for why it will be Janet Napolitano, even though he prefers Wood too.
For what it’s worth, I also worked with some of Napolitano’s senior staffers from AZ during the ’08 Nevada primary, and they adored her.
I’d like a female non-judge. Not sure if I’d prefer Napolitano or Granholm, of those mentioned. Thinking totally outside the box – how about someone like, say, State Attorney General Lori Swanson of Minnesota? Wiki and official bio.
Among the female politicians are there any serious conterders besides Granholm and Napolitano? I’d really like Amy Klobuchar if it weren’t for Tpaw nominating a replacement.
I met some people who had worked for her, and they said she’s basically a crazy and awful person. This was backed up by a general consensus at the fairly well-informed gathering I was at.
Amy Kloubechar?
Wood still sounds very acceptable among the buzz-names. I’d prefer Elizabeth Warren if we’re looking for longshots. For entirely out of the box, Lawrence Lessig would bring much-needed contact with the 21st century to the royal imperial court.
Lessig – that’s a really interesting idea I hadn’t previously heard. But I wonder if he’s too caught up in his Change Congress project to want to be considered.
I have seen Elizabeth Warren a number of times on TV. She is able to explain complex items in a straight-forward, understandable way. I would be happy to see her nominated as I believe that she would view issues from the common-person mind-set.
No one. He can swap a Supreme Joke nomination for getting all of his other nominees out of suspense. Then he can refuse to nominate anyone.
There are currently 6 catholics out of 8 jokes. One more will not make one tiny whit of difference when the joke has been ruling in favor of big business, big government, big army, big religion, pretty much big everything.
The last stats that I saw said that the court ruled against the ordinary american 92 to 8.
Don’t need them. Don’t want them. Screw anyone who wastes time on trying to put in another joke.
The time will come when they rule against Roe vs Wade.
The snakehandlers and the Mormons will be out in force yelling, dancing having fun. When they realize that the entire government is run by the pope’s people they are going to come unglued.
I’d like to see a serious objection to Gov Jennifer Granholm, my pick du jour.
Other than the fact she’s a Catholic, which doesn’t help her cause on a Ct already overstocked with those, I don’t find much to object to, and she’s 9 yrs younger than Diane Wood. And apparently (CNN today with Candy Crowley) she wants the job. There’s a lot to be said for someone who’s fairly upfront about that.
Not only smart and well-educated but, with her confirmation, she’d not only become the best-looking Justice in history, but would immediately create a grassroots clamor for Court proceedings to be televised.
Glenn Greenwald, if only to see the popcorn fly. Otherwise, it’s too far above my mind to posit a serious candidate.
Yeah, that would be interesting. I’d say Jonathan Turley or Lawrence Tribe. Does Marcy Wheeler have a law degree?
Larry’s prime was in the Clinton yrs, but for some reason back then he was passed over. Too old now.
Jonathan Turley? The only thing I need to know about him was that he publicly backed the Repub impeachment putsch in 1998. Interestingly, he was also not upset over the recent Citizens United case that opened up the barn door for corporations to completely dominate in election spending.
Well, Greenwald wasn’t all that upset over Citizens United either. Hell, I bet Diane Wood isn’t perfect either, but then no one is. If you remember, most of the Republican justices actually voted the right way on Kelo v. New London.
I’m not looking for perfection from any of the mortal contenders. But there are some threshold issues and cases for all of us. Citizens United, Bush v Gore, abuse of Congress’ impeachment power by one party, Roe — these are some of the biggies.
Kelo not so much.
As for Greenwald, I think he and Turley, both from the libertarian side of the civil liberties and free speech areas, take that ridiculous ACLU approach of $ = speech, and don’t believe in any campaign finance restraints. I think no regulation ends up being toxic to our democracy, but a few of these people on the left take an absolutist attitude. But as I say, Turley for me gets knocked out on the basis of the Clinton impeachment alone.
HA!! That would be awesome.
Have no knowledge about this. How about Sheldon Whitehouse – except that we can’t spare him right now from the Senate.
I thought that I saw on TB a few days ago that he was appointing a black woman from Chicago. I think her name was Williams. She had been a personal pick of Ronald Reagan to the Appellate Court which doesn’t sound good to me. My first thought was, “Another Clarence Thomas”? With Obama’s known Rightward bias….
I don’t like that pick merely because she is over 60 years old. We need someone who will be there for a while.
Sixty years old means another twenty years. That’s “awhile”.
I’m fine with most of the people I commonly hear.
I do sort of have a hope for that Stanford ConLaw professor though.
I nominate Rachel Maddow.
Female, under 60 and preferably under 50, liberal, extremely smart, and graduated from somewhere other than Harvard or Yale law schools.
Diane Wood obviously fits this description, but I’m sure there are many more options.
This very question inspired me to start blogging and I wondered about what a devious choice Dawn Johnsen might be. Since no one has mentioned her, I decided to put it in writing in case it proved prophetic.