Breaking: Justice Souter To Retire

Add another name to the list? (4.00 / 1)

Marjorie Rendell, whose husband is Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, is on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.  There has been speculation that her (eventual) appointment to SCOTUS was Gov. Rendell's price for supporting Arlen Specter in next year's Democratic primary.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 04:14:18 AM UTC

Thanks, Dan (0.00 / 0)

That is very interesting, and certainly does attest to the very powerful position that Specter has put himself in with his defection to the Dems that put the caucus over the "60 line."

But, the stubborn idealist in me thinks that is not, after all, a very honorable way to choose Supreme Court Justices.  Here's hoping that Obama is able to reach beyond political expediency and nepotism on this one.

---

by: robinia @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 09:43:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

My bottom line (0.00 / 0)

I want someone younger than Roberts.

---

by: Historical Pessimist @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 14:21:59 PM UTC

I have three criteria for all Obama appointments to the SCOTUS (0.00 / 0)

Young, like 45 at most.  Sonia is turning 55

Healthy, to serve real long.  Sonia was diagosed diabetic since age 6

Progressive/Liberal- to offset the four right wingers

---

by: politics64 @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 14:33:29 PM UTC

Diabetes is a health issue? (4.00 / 1)

If diabetes for a Supreme Court judge is a health issue, then I'd love to hear how you'd categorize Roberts' epilepsy or Ginsburg's pacreatic cancer surgery.

Sotomeyor is a perfect nominee here.  Let's not knock her off because she's all of 55 years young and has an easily manageable disease for anyone with the type of health benefit one gets as part of the nine.

---

by: BingChester @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 14:47:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Speaking from personal experience (0.00 / 0)

"Easily manageable" is a stretch. Since she was diagnosed at 6, that means she is insulin-dependent. I am fortunate not to have have complications after almost 30 years of being insulin-dependent myself. But I know what my actuarial tables look like. This is not the form of diabetes Grandpa can control by cutting out desserts and perhaps taking some pills. This requires constant, careful balancing of food and insulin, and you can get knocked out of your equilibrium by any number of factors out of your control.

I'm glad you have a favorite, and Sotomayor may end up being the nominee. But don't pretend diabetes is a non-factor.

---

by: Historical Pessimist @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 15:16:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I just have trouble believing (0.00 / 0)

that her diabetes would cause concerns about her tenure on the Court.  But if you feel otherwise, you have the personal experience that I lack.  Do you think her insulin-dependence would hamper her longevity on the Court?

---

by: BingChester @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 15:35:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's just a fact (0.00 / 0)

She is more prone to heart disease, stroke, kidney disease, blindness,... I'm afraid the list is extensive. If we want someone to counter the deliberate Republican strategy of creating a stranglehold on the Court by appointing people who are as young as possible, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to put someone on whose longevity is questionable, given the overwhelming weight of statistical evidence.

Of course, she could have no trouble at all and live to 100.  And someone else might seem perfectly healthy now and die of cancer in five years. But it isn't a non-factor.

---

by: Historical Pessimist @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 16:19:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

As a 55 year old with diabetes I can tell you that a real long life (0.00 / 0)

expectancy is not in the cards, I may well limp along for 20 years or so but I want this President to give me a Scotus majority by the end of his eight years that I will not have to worry the rest of my life how ever long, that a bunch of corporatist aholes are going to be in the court majority in my lifetime again!

PS Diabetes, especially juvenile, is a very dreadful disease, even under the best dietary and exercise controls.

---

by: politics64 @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 00:54:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is where you'll see real change (0.00 / 0)

Considering the age of the members of the Supreme Court, it is likely that Obama will replace at least three justices, although I think he may replace as many as four in his first term. If Obama is a two-term president, it is possible, if not probable that he may replace up to six or seven justices. Think of the mark that would make in history.

While Souter is considered a liberal, I only have him slightly left of Kennedy. A real progressive in his place can make quite a bit of difference in the upcoming court docket. There are a few First Amendment and Fourth Amendment cases coming up where I'm not sure Souter would have voted with the liberals.

---

by: cliffweathers @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 15:45:50 PM UTC

Souter/Breyer are next (0.00 / 0)

As far as the conservative/liberal spectrum, Souter and Breyer switch depending on the issue.  Breyer was actually in the dissent recently in a case that limited police power in searching ones car without a warrant.  So I'm not sure if it's fair to say that Souter is the most conservative of the left of center block.

However, it's certainly true that the "left" on the court is nowhere near the political position of Marshall or Brennan.  So at the very least, Obama can take one spot and move from the center left a Ginsburg/Stevens position at the very, very least.  I think that's what Sotomeyor or Kagen would do.  

---

by: BingChester @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 16:13:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Surprising (0.00 / 0)

...how my left-wing fellow TAP folk seem to think that discrimination based on age and health condition/disability that would be prosecutable if practiced by the assistant manager of the local 7-11 should be the number one priority in choosing a Supreme Court Justice.

Bush picking Roberts was a cynical, power-grabbing move-- not the best candidate, but one that would exert influence in a conservative direction for a long time.  We should not stoop so low, but do the right thing (best candidate, best balance of viewpoints) and then work like crazy to keep the presidency from falling into the clutches of torturers and fascists ever again.  

---

by: robinia @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 16:18:53 PM UTC

I'm not suggesting an unqualified nominee (0.00 / 0)

But, other things being equal, I want someone on our side with real potential longevity.

---

by: Historical Pessimist @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 16:30:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I second that point (0.00 / 0)

All things being equally, I want someone younger and healthier than I am in the SCOTUS.

---

by: politics64 @ Sat May 02, 2009 at 00:58:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]