I have to laugh at Lindsey Graham’s suggestion that Obama appoint “somebody that is genuinely believed to be acceptable to a wide range of people” to the Supreme Court or forget about passing climate change legislation. What a bunch of baloney!
Not as stupid as Charlie Crist’s suggestion that Obama nominate someone like Roberts or Alito, however.
I think I like Diane Wood the most for the position of the names I’ve heard so far. I think a Wood nomination would become a major abortion fight, but that’s not why I recommend her. Certainly, some other candidates would be less controversial and do a lot less to rile up the Republican base. But when it comes to lifetime appointments, you really have to put short-term politics aside. I think Wood would be the closest candidate to Stevens, and she has a good record of maintaining productive personal relationships with conservatives on the court. Aside from being strongly pro-choice, she seems strong across the board. I have too many questions about Elena Kagan’s position on executive power and detainees to support her. Garland seems inoffensive, but he’s the darling of the right for a reason. My second choice is Leah Ward Sears.
I agree with everything that you said. I’d prefer Pam Karlan over everyone because she’s a strong liberal AND a lesbian; the more diversity the better. Of course Leah Ward Sears would also accomplish that as well.
Still on the short list between the top three, I’m going with Diane Wood.
Also, see BTD’s take on Kagan. Iunno what I think yet, still rustling through Glenn/his take with homework and finals:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2010/4/14/12221/4577
I don’t think I’ve seen Karlan on any short-lists. Let me know if you have a source.
I agree with Armando that the Unitary Executive argument isn’t a problem. But Greenwald has made a compelling argument without relying on the Unitary Executive argument.
Actually, here is the link to his full article on Kagan. I find it overly broad but ultimately persuasive.
.
Yep, still my frontrunner [see my comment].
I like the choice, some interesting background as Law Professor at Univ. of Chicago, combined with motherhood. You know how tough that is!
Fiercely competitive as it is, the University of Chicago’s distinctive culture has helped keep relations cordial on the Seventh Circuit, Wood believes. When she was appointed to the federal bench in 1995, her selection came on the strong recommendation of an Illinois senator who advised the president that a heavy intellectual counterweight was needed to the court’s two conservative lions, sitting Judges Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook. Wood had known both men for some 15 years; they’d taught together at Chicago. At the university, she says, the drive is to debate as hard as possible, but avoid making it personal. She can tick off many of the cases in which she’s dissented from one or both of those two fellow judges — on the legality of random police blockades, on what responsibility a company bears if a supervisor sexually harasses underlings, on whether former Illinois Gov. George Ryan’s corruption conviction should stand. But she keeps the phrasing light and professional, saying things like, “Dick took a different view than I.”
“We have a wonderful working relationship, and I really attribute that to the positive side of that University of Chicago ethos,” she says. “I think it sets a tone for the whole court.”
Scotus Buzz
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Graham can go fuck himself.
Concur on the Wood appointment. Is it wrong to feel such joy at watching Graham and Crist squirm as Obama contemplates a replacement for Justice Stevens? I almost feel guilty at the Republican angst occurring now but, God, it feels so good!
My dream choice would be Elizabeth Warren, but she speaks too much truth too openly, including her misgivings about Obama’s financial reform plans, to get the nod, probably even from the White House.
Of all the names being floated, only Kagan gives me pause. Wood, Sears, Granholm, Koh all seem more than acceptable. Dawn Johnson would be a delightful shock. I don’t quite get the hostility to Garland. Looking at the record, what’s he done to earn the distrust?
While looking around for some info on the nominees, I came across this statement Obama made as a senator re his opposition to confirming Roberts:
I have no concerns about Obama’s basic view of what a member of the court should be. The only problem is how far he’s willing to go to get an easy confirmation. Seems to me the pressure is much less than it is for a cabinet appointment: the court can go on as long as necessary with 8 members, unlike the administration, which needs functioning cabinet members, while the public pressure against roadblocks is probably greater. I’ll be very surprised if I’m not pleased with whoever Obama announces.
My heart’s set on Leah Ward Sears.
I know you posted a couple of days ago that this would make some people mad, but as evidenced by recent polling, they already believe that Obama has done too much for Black people. Which is funny, since there are some (not many) voices in the Black community that he has not done enough.
So if you are damned if you do, damned if you don’t with these people, then I say do whatcha wanna !