Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama change the direction of the Supreme Court? Unlikely. (128 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not enough of a true jurisprudential philosophy (0+ / 0-)

    I think she'd fly through the nomination process, and I think she's a really good judge.  But I don't think she really has a developed jurisprudence.  She still strikes me as a bit of a trial judge.  I think Obama will want someone with a more academic background.  That's why I think Sullivan is the odds on favorite.

    •  Why Sullivan over Kagan... (0+ / 0-)

      Considering you mentioned Kagan as "controversial for other reasons" down below.  

      Nov 4th 2008 - Turn off the dark tonight.

      by Jonze on Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 06:39:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sort of complicated (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Carol in San Antonio

        I think that any "controversy" that would surround Kagan would be completely manufactured, and I don't think it's worth saying anything more than that.  

        I think that Obama might feel some sort of kinship to Sullivan.  Laurence Tribe is one of Obama's trusted advisors and a former professor.  Kathleen Sullivan was a protege of Tribe.  She also has a well developed jurisprudential philosophy, and she has the type of mind that I think Professor Obama really appreciates.  Although I think that Sullivan would have had a difficult time making it through a closely divided Senate, there's no way that the Republicans could maintain a filibuster against her now.

    •  I think Obama will look for smart, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      non-ideological candidates who have deep respect for the Constitution and precedent and who have a pragmatic, problem-solving approach to judging.  I don't think he will be looking especially for academics.

      The festive scenes of liberation that Dick Cheney had once imagined for Iraq were finally taking place -- in cities all over America -- Frank Rich

      by Mother of Zeus on Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 06:42:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Disagree completely with this (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mother of Zeus

        A "pragmatic, problem-solving approach to judging" is probably the very opposite of what a true law nerd like Obama will be looking for.  He might be a political pragmatic, but as Professor Obama he still will be most drawn to someone who tries to have an intellectually rigorous jurisprudence.  

        This "problem solving" approach to judging you speak of is the type of thing that he should -- and I think will -- avoid.

        •  I will be willing to bet that Obama (0+ / 0-)

          will seek to appoint to the federal bench more judges with practical experience judging (or practicing law, for the lower courts) than he will academics.  There is nothing about academic jurisprudence that is more "intellectually rigorous" than day-to-day judging.  It is what the individual brings to the task that counts, not the task itself. That said, it is easy to focus on abstractions and appear to be more intellectually rigorous writing a scholarly article when there are no real interests to weigh, but weighing real interests is what judges - as opposed to law professors - do, and I would bet dollars to doughnuts (maybe not much of a statement in today's economy!) that Obama knows this and that his appointments will reflect this understanding.

          (And, yes, I have  J.D. from a highly academic, top-10 law school, so I'm not just talking out my you-know-what.  ;)  Or at least not totally . . . )

          The festive scenes of liberation that Dick Cheney had once imagined for Iraq were finally taking place -- in cities all over America -- Frank Rich

          by Mother of Zeus on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 08:35:50 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Nope (0+ / 0-)

        Smart - there's a ton of smart ones. Non-ideological - hell, no.  It's going to come down to race and sex. I would like to see Tribe/Lessig/Boies but  I think the white male is not happening for the first 2 nominations - unless they get a black or hispanic female for the first nomination. Also too I would think they wouldn't all quit at the same time. I figure it would be Stevens first, then Ginsburg and then Souter. I believe Ginsburg has a history of breast cancer.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site