Justice Souter to Retire from the Supreme Court

[Gawain 0]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518561,00.html

Just announced on the local Fox affiliate in DC, he'll retire at the end of this session. He was appointed by Presient G.H.W. Bush. I don't know much about him, I understand he has made decisions usually "left of center", if I'm wrong someone will correct me. If true, it's not a loss or gain for President Obama.

[ryoder 1,590]

Apparently, NPR also announced it.
According to his Wikipedia page, at the time of his nomination, everyone thought he was a hardcore conservative, and the liberals fought his nomination. But his voting record has been more liberal than conservative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Souter

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[lawrocket 3]

Souter has been determined more to "lean left." To mean this doesn't mean much. He's been more of a swing vote.

Non-extreme and measured in response. Not the sort of cat that you really study because hye just isn't that interesting.

The "left wing" of the court, though, cannot really expect any "gain" from this.

Note - I heard an interesting quote from some dude from the "Alliance For Justice.". He said something to the effect of wanting Obama to appoint an "eminently qualified" candidate who is "committed to core constitutional values" and "committed to justice for all and not uust a few."

Um. I think that "ommitted to the core values of the Constitution" should be the ONLY commitment. There are times when the Constitution simply isn't much on "justice."

So "committed to justice" can at times not be reconciled with commitment to the "core values of the Constitution."

I fear the thinking in that guy's statement.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Obama may have Feinstein replace Souter.

After all they do see eye to eye on things.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Non-extreme and measured in response.

I like that in a judge.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Note - I heard an interesting quote from some dude from the "Alliance For Justice.". He said something to the effect of wanting Obama to appoint an "eminently qualified" candidate who is "committed to core constitutional values" and "committed to justice for all and not uust a few."

Um. I think that "ommitted to the core values of the Constitution" should be the ONLY commitment.

absolutely, and by definition

as soon as his axe appears in the statement (for the slow here, the axe I'm talking about is the one he's apparently been grinding) then we need to fear his intents

the only litmus test for a supreme court judge should be his record of upholding the law whether or not his decisions align with his personal biases. and confidence he'll continue to do so

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[lawrocket 3]

It has its place. On the other hand, measured responses can muddy things. Measured responses also may result in a failure to uphold the law.

The courts - especially the SCOTUS - are tasked with deciding whether something is or is not Constitutional.

The more measured they are, the more confusing things can be sometimes. Other times it certainly does have its place.

I, On the other hand, rather like a "yes" or "no". I believe that there is room for ideologues.

Who do I see as standing a good chance? Cass Sunstein. Obama is probably going to have a shot at 3 SCOTUS justices just in his first term. Ginsburg may not last much longer. Nor will Stevens (he just turned 89 years old!).

Kennedy may also retire - he's 76.

It could make sense for Obama's first pick to be someone like Sunstein - a helluva scholar on the "liberal" side, but who has some conservative leanings.

When Stevens and Ginsburg go, he can go for others like Harold Koh and Kathleen Sullivan. But if he picks Sunstein it will be a move that I support.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Does regional representation play into the mix for SCOTUS picks? Race and gender matter, anything else?

[quade 4]

Quote

Obama may have Feinstein replace Souter.

After all they do see eye to eye on things.

Not going to happen.

Feinstein is getting pretty long in the tooth. Expect someone younger.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Quote

Does regional representation play into the mix for SCOTUS picks? Race and gender matter, anything else?

Age.

You'd want to nominate someone that is experienced enough to hold the position, but young enough to last for a few years.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Does regional representation play into the mix for SCOTUS picks? Race and gender matter, anything else?

it absolutely shouldn't

why would anyone think that home region, race or gender has anything to do with ability to be a good judge?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Does regional representation play into the mix for SCOTUS picks? Race and gender matter, anything else?

Age.

You'd want to nominate someone that is experienced enough to hold the position, but young enough to last for a few years.

so what age range do think is appropriate, then?

since we are now entering sexist, ageist, racist requirements into the job description.....

I'd agree with experience being a criteria in that they need to have a track record long enough to demonstrate their ability to do the job without personal bias, but I'd have a hard time tying and age to it

I guess somewhere between 25 and 102.......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[quade 4]

Quote

I guess somewhere between 25 and 102.......

I believe you completely ignored the second half of the sentence. Generally speaking, most 102-year-olds aren't going to be around very long.

If you (as the theoretical POTUS) were going to nominate someone, you'd probably want that person to serve as long as possible. Take the average lifespan of a typical American and subtract say, 16 years. I would think that's pretty much the upper limit of what I, in that same position, would consider.

Now, look at this list of people some say are in the running;
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/01/list-of-possible-replacements-for-justice-david-souter/

I think you'll see a trend with the average age.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[wmw999 2,644]

Quote

why would anyone think that home region, race or gender has anything to do with ability to be a good judge?

Because life experience sometimes has to do with being a good judge. The Constitution is the basis, but understanding of the human side can come from different points of view, and that's enhanced by having a variety of justices.

If it were up to one type of person, why not just have one justice?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Does regional representation play into the mix for SCOTUS picks? Race and gender matter, anything else?

In this administration, it seems that women play a very prominent lead. Much has been discussed regarding the probability of a woman to be appointed.

They are also looking into a minority. I think this is the main things that would count against Sunstein, who has everything demographically against him.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Constitution is the context, but understanding of the human side can come from different points of view, and that's enhanced by having a variety of justices

I'm not saying you are wrong (you and nerdgirl are always right) but you are describing working backward - using the Contitution to put a decision in context in stead of basing the decision on the Constitution.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[wmw999 2,644]

I misstated, and will go fix it. The Constitution is the basis, but it is nevertheless a human document, written by humans, that requires interpretation by humans. And that requires context.

But I'm still not wrong

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)