Sandra Day O'Connor Retires

Agreed. The fact that the administration no longer relies on the American Bar Association to help in the nomination of judges tells me that they don't want a legal scholar on the bench, rather a party man who will toe the line no matter what.

 

The Chief Justice's health is failing; if George W. Bush tells Renquist to step down, he'll step down...perhaps not immediately in the wake of this O'Connor retirement, but soon! You keep forgetting about the awesome power of the Executive office!

 

I agree. I think certain lessons have been learned from the Souter "fiasco", and conservatives will not likely make that mistake twice.

On a side note - today is one of those days you get a guilty pleasure from being a politics wonk.

 

Since the Founding Fathers didn't say it, it doesn't count.

 

I have ITN on ignore but somehow his posts still end up in my email notifications. Grrr.

The White House rarely tries to force SC justices off the bench. The last instance I recall was when LBJ force Goldberg to the UN so he could put Fortis on the bench. I have read various things that Rhenquist still wants to go on at this point, and that is his right. If there is any pressure on Rhenquist to retire, it could come from his bretheran, since an infirmed justice, especially a CJ, can really impead the workload on the court.

 

This is important because she was big swing vote.

 

Shockingly, I don't agree with In the Net's assessment that Ted Olson WILL BE the next Supreme Court Justice or that Rehnquist will step down just b/c the White House tells him to. The great thing here is that it's not just a difference in ideology that separates us this time, but actually a reasonable lack of knowledge on his part. Which, again, is shocking.

Now, that's not to say that Rehnquist won't step down. But it won't be because of some order from the White House. Rather, it would be because now he, as a staunch Republican, knows that he would allow the White House to shape judicial policy with one fell swoop. OK, the motivation would be the same, but Rehnquist's respect for separation of powers and the independent judiciary would mean the actual reason would be different.

And that's not to say that Olson won't be the next Justice, but conventional wisdom on the DC legal community has either John Roberts or Michael Luttig as the front runners. They're just conservative enough to fit Bush's desires but not so much as to create excessive confrontation through the confirmation process. My guess is that the White House really does want Rehnquist to step down now, though, so they don't have to decide between the two.

 

And the Rehnquist ego suggests he'd rather die on the bench.

 

If I'm reading the consensus among Dems here, it seems that Gonzalez is OK despite being a clear political appointee who gave legal sanction to a torture policy at the behest of the President. Yet anyone who might threaten Roe is worthy of filibuster to the death.

Interesting set of priorities for an independent judiciary branch.

 

As usual I agree with the Gringo. Although i will keep a low profile about it. AG is absolutely the best that the American people can hope for with Bush making the nominations.

 

I'm just saying that Gonzalez is going to get strong support if he is nominated. I know the dems will try to stick the tourture thing on him, but he has enough stuff in his favor that would get him approved.

 

Agree that Roe will be the Holy Grail. But I don't think that is a matter that anyone will touch. Too politically charged...but it will underlie a great deal of thought and discussion.

Bush will certainly appoint the most conservative person that he believes he can get approved...and no matter who that is, there will be an interesting time for all.

 

That's a pretty weak point. The reason AG would be good is that he is intelligent. With names like Cornyn (moronic empty suit) and then you standard issue republican wack jobs, a guy like Gonzalez seems to have the look of someone who will use the independence of the position to be his own man.

His flaw in the torture policy memos was that he was being an advocate. He was being a lawyer and coming up with what his bosses wanted to hear.

 

Sorry, brain freeze. Ignore that post.

 

Not really. The fact that Alberto is considered preferred just shows how awful the pool of potential replacements is when you're dealing with this disgrace of a President.

 

I think he should go with Thomas for CJ if that post opens up, I could live with Scalia as well.

As for who the replacement should be, I have no clue. It should be someone who shares a similar philosophy to Scalia, Thomas, and Renquist. Someone who believes in federalism would be nice.

 

This is terrible news because it will mean a complete meltdown in the Senate IF BushCo appoints a knuckle-dragger to replace the moderate.

My fervent hope is that Reinquist kicks the bucket, giving BushCo a two-fer. In a grand compromise, BushCo appoints one moderate + one knuckle-dragger, thus maintaining the status-quo and giving all parties the opportunity to claim a win.

However, the recent record of BushCo indicates they will likely attempt to streamroll the dems and push through a slate of knuckle-draggers. The nu-kuler scenario is looking pretty damn real right now.

 

While Scalia and Thomas both make me retch, are they any worse than Reinquist? If not, why not CJ?

 

It happened before. Rhenquist was put on the court when he was paired up with a more moderate choice, Lewis Powell.

 

dog help our country

I fidured that O'Connor retired for family reasons. Her husband is quite ill.

Either that, or she woke up with a horse head next to her in bed recently.

 

Also, he was following an opinion on the difference between fighting an enemy not clearly defined by geography as opposed to the wars of the past. That opinion had already been handed to him by Ashcroft and others. He was not much more than a secretary/administrative assistant. He "penned" the memo. Nothing more.