Free Markets, Free People


Possible SCOTUS picks

Daniel Foster at NRO lays out what most people feel are the most probable picks by President Obama for the upcoming vacancies on the Supreme Court:

Merrick Garland -  a former federal prosecutor and current D.C. Circuit appeals judge. A Clinton appointee, Garland is well-liked by Democrats and even some Republicans in the Senate.

Elena Kagan – The first-female Solicitor General and probably first-runner-up for the Sotomayor seat, Kagan has a record of the kind of cagey jurisprudence that is ideal for a tough confirmation battle. She is well-respected by just about everybody on both sides, but lacks the paper trail that would reveal just how far to the left she’d sit.

Diane Wood – Another Clinton appointee, considered the heaviest liberal counterweight to the conservative Chicago Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals dominated by Richard A. Posner. Wood was a colleague of President Obama at the University of Chicago Law School.

Pamela Karlan – A professor at Stanford Law School, Karlan is a longshot once was described by the New York Times as a “snarky. . . Antonin Scalia for the left.” Karlan is openly gay, and an outspoken liberal.

As Foster says, Pamela Karlan is probably the least likely of the 4 listed to be nominated, but still a possibility.  Since it is a liberal seat that’s being filled, the current balance won’t change.  From what I’ve read, the least liberal of the bunch is Garland, and, as Foster implies, is the one with the most reasonable chance of confirmation of the four.  If he’s the nominee, I’d imagine that the GOP won’t put up that much of a fight.  If, however, any of the other three should be nominated, expect a fight.  Also expect the usual charges of sexism to be thrown out there during that fight.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

15 Responses to Possible SCOTUS picks

  • Since Karlan seems the most radical I would give her about a 90% chance to get picked.  Hillary has a 5% shot to get picked.  The rest are long shots.

    Since Garland would be the least objectional of the lot he has the less chance.

  • Given the continued nostalgia for racism on the part of the Democratic Party, I was expecting a pick like Harvard’s Cornell West.  This pick would leave a lasting mark on America and fit right into the Obama legacy of the realization of the “Peter Principle” on the national level.

  • “Karlan is (female) openly gay, and an outspoken liberal.”
    ’nuff sed.

  • Why shouldn’t the GOP filibuster and fight WHOEVER Obama picks?

    After how he rammed down healthcare, scorched earth should be the order of the day, and the Dems shouldn’t even be able to get a resolution declaring kittens to be cute passed

    • With MiniTru already beating them to death with that “Party of ‘No’” guff???  I’m sure that there are also plenty of GOP members and staffers who remember how trying to block Slick Willie rebounded on them.  More recently, the case of Jim Bunning illustrates what happens if the GOP tries anything resembling “scorched earth”.

      In many ways, it would just fit Imeme’s pistol to have the GOP become too obdurate.  More than any president in my lifetime, he MUST have a villain to campaign against.  When it looked like ObamaCare was going to fail, he and his minions were in full blame mode: it was the GOP’s fault for blocking reform!  Never mind that the GOP didn’t have the numbers to block anything until Brown was elected.  It’s never Imeme’s fault.

  • If The Clown™ nominates Kagan, he will be in for the fight of his life. She is a radical leftist, who argued for the rights of terrorists and to close Guantánamo Bay. We do not need someone like her on the Court. She is frighteningly liberal.

    • I tend to think the Repubs will put up a token fight aimed more at PR that principles.

    • I agree with Sharpshooter: the GOP doesn’t have the stomach or the stones for a real fight.  Indeed, I can see a few RINO’s (Graham leaps to mind) turning himself inside-out to come up with a reason to support ANY nominee Imeme cares to put up.

  • ” Since it is a liberal seat that’s being filled, the current balance won’t change. ”

    I disagree with this statement.  The four Constitutional and Conservative judges enjoyed the occasional defection of some of the liberal judges.  Individually those defections wouldn’t make much of a difference.  But between the 3 (give or take) defectors combined it provided some modicum of balance.  On occasion, Stevens was one of those defectors.

    As those occasional defectors are replaced with a set of solid five liberal judges they will have a fully empowered activist SC.

  • “If The Clown™ nominates Kagan, he will be in for the fight of his life. She is a radical leftist, who argued for the rights of terrorists and to close Guantánamo Bay. We do not need someone like her on the Court. She is frighteningly liberal.”

    In other words she is a natural pick for Obama.