Reply With Quote
She's Condi Rice in a judge's robe!
/elpimpo
I predict Judge Brown
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/brownresume.htm
She's Condi Rice in a judge's robe!
/elpimpo
Judge Brown.
It'll be a tough sell though (no surprise), the left is already casting her as right of Scalia and Thomas and the Congressional Black Caucas will not support her.
I actually think that the O'Connor replacement may be a place where the political firestorm associated with Katrina will have an impact on how the White House acts in another situation. I don't know that the President has the political capital to push a controversial choice through the Senate, particularly with the possibility of a filibuster looming. The Administration's struggles (real or perceived) to address the needs of New Orleans in the hurricane's aftermath could diminish any negative political effect that a filibuster might have had.
Just a thought.
Makes sense. Also, I would add that the nominee would be replacing a justice who has been a swing vote. Should Bush nominate a more solid judicial conservative to replace O'Connor then it will be clear that the court's balance could shift to the right, which should engender a much more spirited response from the left.
Roberts' confirmation is going to breeze through. The left has nothing on him. I think that the fact that Roberts is replacing Rehnquist has somewhat muted the attacks from the left, at least in the Senate. A conservative justice replaces a conservative justice. Even though that shouldn't temper the ideological battle, it seems to have happened.
But the O'Connor replacement is going to create a nasty, bitter fight. At this moment, I suspect that Bush will nominate Brown. Nominating the first African-American female to the Supreme Court wouldn't be a bad political move for Bush. In some respects, after the Katrina mess, it would make sense politically since so many in this country still give so much importance to race.
I think the Roberts hearing is all about setting the groundwork for the next confirmation battle because O'Connor's seat is vital if the Democrats are to resist a hard right turn. What's going on now is just the warm-up. Roberts will be confirmed and he'll be confirmed by a substantial margin unless something dramatic comes to light this week.
At this moment, although they might provide their own political expedience in other ways, I'd be surprised if Bush went with the deeply conservative candidates that were being bandied about before the Roberts nomination in the first instance. Again, a very conservative nominee (I think) will beget a filibuster, which in light of Katrina, won't be quite the same politically bloody choice it would have been several months ago. In the mid-term elections and again in 2008, if the Republicans want to lambaste the Democrats for "obstructionism" in filibustering a judicial nominee, the Democrats will be able to focus on the problems with responding to Katrina and, I guess, argue that they're more interested in people than parlimentary procedure.
True, which is why nominating a black female makes quite a bit of sense, from a raw political viewpoint.
Judge Judy.
I'd think moderate black female would face a fairly innocuous proceeding. I think, however, that a very conservative nominee, even a black female, is likely to get filibustered.
Sure, but then the Demos are put in the position of blocking the nomination of the 1st black female to the SC.
She's my pick as well.
Not a position they'd likely enjoy, I'd imagine. Yikes.
Not to mention she's damn qualified and competent.
Where is NBAdan's pick? Or does he just post other peoples news articles?
Who will Bush pick? Tell us thru your dark looking glass of wisdom.
Libs are already preparing for another attempt at a "high tech lynching".
Yeah, I wonder who the male Anita Hill will be and if it'll be Coke again or Pepsi this time.
I just visited Michael Moooooores website to get a take on who dan will pick as Bush's nomination but Michael's still preoccupied with Sheehan so dan's just gonna have to wait.
Really? How funny.
It's hard to believe Brown would be the pick. If Bush had a inkling towardsher, other Republicans would dissuade him. She is surprisingly anti-business for such a hard-right Judge. How humiliating would it be for Bush's own party to reject his nominee?
It makes sense that TRO/Yoni would like her because she is hardcore socially conservative with strong libertarian leanings. But she's only a well-known jurist because of her "colorful" opinions and her lack of collegaility with fellow judges. She's not distinguished for her legal mind.
Brown is not qualified to serve on the SCOTUS. I like her on the Ninth Circuit simply because those communist idiots need to be smacked around by a firebreathing rightie. They richly deserve the disrespect with which she treats them. But she is a poor choice for the top court in the land.
She's like Blackmun in the sense that she often fails to understand the implications of her opinions. In her, we very well could end up with a justice who writes right-wing rants that end up as liberal judicial victories simply because ACLU et al have better command of the law than she does. It would suck for the Republicans to expend what little political capital they have left to confirm a justice who spends the next 30 years wreaking havoc on conservative causes like a bull in a china shop.
If Bush feels he needs to nominate a woman/minority because he's already nominated a white male, then Clement's a likelier pick. I think Bush will rank his own federal court nominees over those who were around when he came in office, because of his stubborn loyalty. So, in order I'd say Clement, then McConnell.
If not for his being a white male, McConnell would be the obvious pick in light of the re-emergence of this whole Pledge of Allegiance flap. He's the foremost expert in the country on the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses.
When you said Judge Brown...I at first thought you meant this one:
hahaha that's friggin uber... hahah has to wait for the DNC talking paper before he makes a choice... cause he's too busy working on the Plantation.
It also could be Alberto G... He been spending a lot of time with dubya in the last weeks...
I hadn't thought of it that way, but I would tend to agree, even despite my general opposition to conservative views of legal issues.
I'll weigh in, though, to say that if Bush wants to appoint a conservative woman who is smart and fairly principled in the way she crafts opinions, I think his best choice from within the federal judiciary would be Edith Jones. Most of the knowledgable, non-conservative attorneys I know shudder at the thought that Jones would actually end up on the Court because she is perceived to be smart enough to understand the law and the implications of her decisions. Judge Jones has been the bridesmaid at least once and may have even come in second to Roberts (I'm still convinced that Clement was a complete smokescreen and that she was never #1 or #2 for the original Roberts nomination).
I'd think Gonzalez is the nominee only if the White House is convinced that there is no way to get a preferred nominee through. Gonzalez has too many liberal-looking warts to appeal to Bush's conservative base.
If Bush nominates Gonzales, that would confirm he's braindead.
The left will not accept him because of his role in the less pleasant aspects of the GWOT.
The right will not accept him because of his soft stance on social issues.
With Coburn and the four Democrats, Gonzales might not even get out of committee.
Edit: Make that Coburn and the eight Democrats.
Last edited by Extra Stout; 09-16-2005 at 04:17 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
