Skip to main content

Guess who could be nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court if Willard Mitt Romney becomes the 45th president of the United States of America?

How's about fellow lifelong Mormon Jay Scott Bybee, age 58, currently sitting on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, just a stepping stone below the Supremes.

Judge Bybee's creds are impressively LDS and Republican:

Magna Cum Laude, with Highest Honors, Brigham Young University, 1977
Juris Doctor Cum Laude, BYU's J. Reuben Clark Law School, 1980
Editorial board of BYU Law Review
Law clerk to Judge Donald S. Russell of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Service in the U.S. Justice Department under Reagan, Bush and Bush
Law prof at various learning institutions around the U.S. of A. since

But, most of all, most of all folks ... and this spews forth small beads of sweaty lust on the broad forehead of Richard Bruce Cheney, formerly Vice:

John Yoo and Jay Bybee were the two Justice Department lawyers responsible for the memos authorizing the Bush Administration's use of torture. Torture is illegal under United States and international law. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution forbids the government's use of cruel and unusual punishment. Under Article Six of the Constitution, treaties signed by the U.S. are the "supreme Law of the Land". Two international human rights treaties outlawing torture, the Geneva Convention and the U.N. Convention Against Torture, were signed by the U.S. In addition, the U.S. Criminal Code and the Army Field Manual prohibit torture, war crimes, and degrading treatment of detainees. The legal memoranda (see the original "Torture Memos" here) authored by Yoo and Bybee advised Bush Administration officials that the U.S. and International Law regarding torture did not apply to Taliban detainees or others with suspected links to Al-Qaeda and terrorism.
Oooh! Once again contravening the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Geneva Convention, the UN Convention against Torture, international treaties, the U.S. Criminal Code and the Army Field Manual.

You know that could only gladden and bring great joy to the heart of Willard, fierce cutter of long blond gaylocks, slammer of the blind into glass doors, pushers of the faces of sons into dishes of butter, imprisoner of frightened dog into pen upon station wagon, lawless impersonator of traffic cop to terrify the unwary, etc., etc.

One can but breathlessly await the looming, dooming justiceship of the Bybee.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Romney won't nominate Bybee (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TexDem, gooderservice, FG, chimene

    Unless the GOP has 60 votes in the Senate Romney won't nominate Bybee, he has too much baggage. I am sure he would love to nominate Bybee but Romney will nominate someone very conservative but difficult to filibuster, a Sam Alito type.  

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 10:42:57 AM PDT

    •  Alito wasn't difficult to filibuster. (0+ / 0-)

      All it required was an opposition party.

      •  Elwood - Alito was difficult to filibuster (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TexDem

        and that's why he wasn't. Sam Alito met all the qualifications for being elevated to the SCOTUS. His supporters were also able to find other judges and law clerks, across the political spectrum, who were eager to testify at the Senate hearings that Alito was fair and respectful to all parties and was not an ideologue. We will never see a Ruth Bader Ginsberg (general counsel of the ACLU), or a Thurgood Marshall (general counsel of the NAACP), or someone who came from a similar conservative organization unless one party has a super majority in the Senate. What we will see are the Sonya Sotomayor and Sam Alito type justices and the Senate will not filibuster those nominations.  

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 11:50:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And that's because we don't have (0+ / 0-)

          opposition parties.

          The way to get a better Supreme Court is to nominate some people who are not law geeks. Governors, Senators.

          Since O'Connor left, nobody on the Court was ever elected to anything.  That makes these ivory tower incompetents able to ignore reality, as in Citizens United.

  •  Oh, dear (0+ / 0-)

    That does seem like a likely possibility.

    Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

    by milkbone on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 10:43:41 AM PDT

  •  More likely choice is Clement (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, Enterodynia

    Especially if the court rules against the ACA. He's young and he's admired/respected on both sides. He's Obama's former classmate yet he's as conservative as they come. It'll likely be him.

  •  Obviously ... Clement AND Bybee (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mooshter, wasatch

    Romney as president may actually have an option on three justices.

  •  Bybee (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karen Hedwig Backman

    I've told this story before on here. I think a couple times. Jay Bybee was a law professor of mine in law school. I believe I had him for two different courses. I know Administrative Law was one. Can't recall the other (its been quite awhile).

    Nice guy personally. That's my opinion. Very nice. Differed with him completely on his politics, but always thought of him as very honest and fair. He was a reference for me when I got out of law school. Lost touch with him over ten years ago. I didn't even know he was IN the Bush Justice Department until I read a story on the memos long after the fact.

    None of this is really relevant to anything, but it always reminds me when I read venom towards him (and I'm not saying its not justified on some level) my human connection to him and what a good person I always believed him to be back then. It just goes to show you, I hate a lot of these people too on the other end of the spectrum as well. I spew venom, but the weird thing is the one guy I happened to know, I actually liked a lot on a personal level.

    By the way, his views back then I always found to be more Libertarian than Republican and I recall him often describing himself that way.

    "Deserves got nothing to do with it"-William Munny, "Unforgiven"

    by GDoyle on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 11:25:53 AM PDT

  •  Critical Mass. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wasatch, Karen Hedwig Backman

    Ignorance can reach a critical mass. When it gains sufficient ascendency it becomes self perpetuating. Once this happens it is difficult if not impossible for rationality to maintain a foothold. Once enough societal intitutions become arrayed toward darkness they attain the power to suffocate and suppress dissenting voices. In our society the single most important factor in the accretion of this benighted critical mass is the makeup of the Suipreme Court.

    This is why your scenario is so starkly frightening. The momentum has long since turned in favor of those peddling bigotry in the service of plutocracy.  We live under a constant barrage of dishonest right wing propaganda over communication channels under the control of corporations, science is under ideological and religious attack,  we have corporations now unleashed by Citizens United to spend unlimited amounts to sell a one-sided agenda under which profit trumps the welfare of the populace, we have states anxious to use voucher schemes to publicly finance "education" that will be little more than indoctrination camps run by fundamentalist religious movements or by corporate schools that will be another fecund source of lobbying and funding for right wing politicians, and just recently, newly favored "opt-in" laws are posing a threat to the entire labor movement.

    If we haven't already reached this critical mass we are clearly tottering on the brink. One more ultra-conservative vote on the Court would be a disaster and might be the final nail in the coffin for any hope to change the direction this country is headed.

    If anyone on the left is tempted to slack off in this election cycle because Obama is not green enough, or liberal enough or feisty enough, or whatever, I seriously urge you to consider how close we are to a critical mass of ignorance and how devastating another radical appointment on the Court would be.  

  •  Did you know the 9th has a new seal? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karen Hedwig Backman

    White-collar conservatives flashing down the street, pointing their plastic finger at me..

    by BOHICA on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 08:43:17 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site