Obama Supreme Court

[Kano]

<!-- end .topics --><!-- end: .hd --><CITE class=caption>AFP/File – Ths US Supreme Court (L) in Washington, DC in June 2008. President-elect Barack Obama may have the rare … </CITE>

<!-- end #main-media -->

• <CITE></CITE>
  

<!-- end .primary-media -->

<!-- end .related-media -->WASHINGTON (AFP) – President-elect Barack Obama may have the rare chance to appoint two judges to the Supreme Court, giving the former law professor an opportunity to make a further lasting mark on American society.

Already observers are weighing in on what Obama could do in the key decision on replacements for the highest court in the land.

"It is quite likely he would choose a woman or a minority," said Nathaniel Persily, a law professor at Columbia University in New York.

"If he could find a Hispanic woman, that would be ideal, the best choice," he added.

Only two women have served on the Supreme Court, and two African-Americans have succeeded one another in the same seat, but never has an judge with a Latino background been appointed.

Hispanics are an ever-growing demographic in the United States, making up 15 percent of the population.

But beyond the race or sex of the candidate, observers are gearing up for appointments of politically progressive judges to the bench to replace the older liberals sitting on it today.

John Paul Stevens, appointed by president Gerald Ford, is 88 years old, and is expected to resign soon.

The nine justices are appointed for life.

Widely considered to be on the liberal side of the court, Stevens' replacement with another liberal would maintain the bench's fragile balance.

Currently four conservatives, four liberals, with the moderate Anthony Kennedy holding the middle ground, compose a balance Obama is expected to sustain.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 75, appointed by president Bill Clinton, is another liberal lifer also expected to resign within Obama's first term in office.

During Obama's campaign the Democrat hinted at what he expected of his appointees, and certainly could surprise conservative commentators expecting him to name someone more radical to the post.

"His pick might be radical, not in the ideology but in the background," noted Persily.

Obama could pick someone who has not made a career in the judicial system, for example a politician or law professor, he added.

The president-elect has said he would take his own experience into account in making the decision.

"I taught constitutional law for 10 years and when you look what makes a great Supreme Court justice, it's not just the particular issue and how they rule but it's their conception of the court," said Obama in a interview during his campaign.

Traditionally the two major parties, Democrats and Republicans, have split firmly on their judgment of what the Supreme Court can and can't do for the evolution of American society.

Republicans have forcibly lobbied for judges who strictly adhere to the constitution, and criticized Democrat appointees who attempt to advance societal norms in a way they call "legislating from the bench."

A slew of controversial issues such as gay marriage, abortion rights, gun ownership, the death penalty, privacy and the Internet are all likely to resurface in coming years.

Many in the weakened Republican party fear the more liberal judges could make sweeping changes in law that could serve as precedent throughout the nation.

But in the hubbub surrounding Obama's projected appointments, his friend Cass Sunstein, a preeminent American legal scholar at Harvard University, Massachusetts -- where Obama himself studied -- noted a fact often overlooked.

"The first thing to know about Obama, which hasn't gotten sufficient attention, is that he is himself appointable to the Supreme Court," Sunstein said.

"He is a constitutional specialist who has taught for many years. There's a guarantee that we'd get someone of the first intellectual rank." "Not Harriet Miers," he added, referring to the ultra-conservative lawyer nominated by President George W. Bush, and who was withdrawn when criticized across the political spectrum for never having served as a judge and being ill-prepared and uninformed.

[G27]

Luckily the two oldest (the two mentioned in the article) are lefties - so as long as none of the more conservative judges don't step down, we're really no worse off...

[Kano]

I worked over 20 years in the DOC when I lived in CT.. and the last thing we all need is more bleeding heart liberals in power protecting scum bags rights who steal..murder...rape and so on. They should out law SHI# BAGS like Ted Kennedy who kill with cars .. and leave gun owners alone...

<CENTER>Everything YouEver Wanted to Know About Ted Kennedy *

* ( and he was afraid you'd ask )</CENTER>

http://www.ytedk.com/ click on link.....

<CENTER>CHAPPAQUIDDICK:

A Profile in CowardiceTed Kennedy, the accident, and the cover-up</CENTER>

Edited November 6, 2008 by Kano

[jughead]

this supreme court thing scares the hell out of this old man

[Guest sermon8r]

Bill and Hill..... first hubby and wife appointed to the court..... they are both liers......opps lawyers

[Oh Shoot]

Bill and Hill..... first hubby and wife appointed to the court..... they are both liers......opps lawyers

Unless something has changed, Slick Willie can't even try a case before the Supreme Court, much less serve as a judge. (disbarred for a while and later resigned from Arkansas bar and etc)...

- OS

[Guest Len]

This is very true. While many fret about who President-elect Obama might end up appointing, it should be realized the two justices most likely to resign are 2 of the most liberal on the court. It is unlikely 4 years or even 8 of Obama as President will do much more than extend the current 5-4 splits we often see.

A more interesting thing to look at will be appointments of Federal Judges. There are MANY vacancies (both Clinton and Bush were VERY SLOW in making these appointments and the Senate EVEN SLOWER in confirming them), and many more to come. These appointments, sure to sail through the Senate, will have lasting impact for decades. Federal judges also are the "farm team" for SCOTUS.

Luckily the two oldest (the two mentioned in the article) are lefties - so as long as none of the more conservative judges don't step down, we're really no worse off...

[Guest slothful1]

so as long as none of the more conservative judges don't step down, we're really no worse off...

Step down? I'm more worried about some lefty nut being, let's say, 'pro-active'.

[G27]

Step down? I'm more worried about some lefty nut being, let's say, 'pro-active'.

Possibly, but I can't readily recall a supreme court justice ever being assassinated.

And if we're truly honest with ourselves, it's typically/historically been the right that's been prone to such violence here in the USA. Not saying there aren't crazy lefties and not saying it's impossible, just saying...

[Tim Nunan]

This is very true. While many fret about who President-elect Obama might end up appointing, it should be realized the two justices most likely to resign are 2 of the most liberal on the court. It is unlikely 4 years or even 8 of Obama as President will do much more than extend the current 5-4 splits we often see.

A more interesting thing to look at will be appointments of Federal Judges. There are MANY vacancies (both Clinton and Bush were VERY SLOW in making these appointments and the Senate EVEN SLOWER in confirming them), and many more to come. These appointments, sure to sail through the Senate, will have lasting impact for decades. Federal judges also are the "farm team" for SCOTUS.

The other judical appointments should be of equal concern and with the liberal Congress Obama will have little to no trouble getting them approved.