Big Fat Story
Because Justice Stevens is a liberal, whoever replaces him won’t overturn the Supreme Court’s conservative majority. Judge Diane Pamela Wood, 58, is comfortable in the minority. She “has spent the last 14 years going toe-to-toe with the legendary conservative lions of Chicago's 7th Circuit Court of Appeals,” according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Conservatives rule the 7th Circuit, which includes Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana, but Wood has argued “that atheists should be able to challenge the mostly Christian prayers Indiana legislators use to open their sessions, that a gay Wisconsin teacher should be able to sue for alleged discrimination, that a Jewish condo dweller should be able to sue for discrimination when the building makes her take down her mezuzah, or that Indiana voters should not have to show ID to vote.” She and Obama were senior lecturers together at the University of Chicago, but a few abortion-rights decisions might make her a lightning rod for conservatives: She wrote a dissent against state bans of “partial-birth abortions” in 2007; she ruled that Planned Parenthood could use the “RICO” anti-mob law to sue anti-abortion protesters; and she wrote a dissent arguing against an Indiana law that required a woman to seek in-person counseling before seeking an abortion.
President Obama’s solicitor general, Elena Kagan, 49, has been at work for only a few months, but might she already be due for a promotion? Kagan was one of President Clinton’s domestic policy advisers. He nominated her to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1999, but her appointment stalled in the Senate. She then served as dean of Harvard Law School, where she unified divisive factions in the faculty, and boosted student morale. In addition to her experience (however short-lived) as solicitor general, she would bring executive experience and a knowledge of legal scholarship to the job. During her confirmation hearings as solicitor general in March, conservatives accused her of dodging their questions—a possible prelude to another go-round with the Senate. “When the Senate ceases to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues,” Kagan wrote in a 1995 article, “the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce.” The trick to a confirmation hearing, she explained, is “alternating platitudinous statement and judicious silence.”
Photo: Ryan Kelly, Congressional Quarterly / Getty Images
Sunstein, 54, has written hundreds of legal articles and 34 books, most recently, Going To Extremes and Nudge. He taught at the University of Chicago with Obama and recently returned to Harvard before being tapped to head the powerful White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Could the Supreme Court be the next stop for the most-cited law professor in the country? He’s already experienced a difficult nomination process. His name is one of the first on Court watchers’ lips these days. When Elena Kagan stole Sunstein away from Chicago to teach at Harvard Law School, she called him "the preeminent legal scholar of our time—the most wide-ranging, the most prolific, the most cited, and the most influential.” Not light praise, particularly coming from the competition. But it also means he’s got the mother of all paper trails.
Photo: UPI / Landov
The New Next Supreme Court Justice
Rumors are swirling that 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens may step down next year. The politics this time around will be trickier; no "first Hispanics" or cushion in the polls. The Daily Beast asks Thomas Goldstein, SCOTUSBlog founder, who Obama will pick next.
Garland, 56, clerked for Justice William Brennan. He’s earned praise from conservatives for being a consensus-seeker. His biggest ruling came last year when he rejected the government’s evidence for keeping a prisoner at Gitmo. Garland was nominated to his current seat on the D.C. Circuit by Bill Clinton in 1995. During the last vacancy, filled by Sonia Sotomayor, Bloomberg News, among others, suggested that Garland’s chance might increase when a second seat opened up, with the desire to find a female Justice already fulfilled. According to The New York Times, Garland was one of nine candidates on the White House’s short list last time around.
Photo: Charles Dharapak / AP Photo
The Canadian-born Democrat has one of the least enviable jobs in government—being governor of Michigan, where the unemployment rate is among the highest in the country. Like Obama, Granholm, 50, attended Harvard Law School. She was a member of his transition team and is a former attorney general of Michigan. The onetime prosecutor was on Obama’s shortlist the last time around. What might be holding Granholm back? According to The New York Times, Granholm’s “fast ascent to the state’s top political job and lack of judicial experience has left only a lean record for scrutiny of her legal thinking.”
Photo: Bill Pugliano / Getty Images
Holder was thrust into the spotlight early during Barack Obama’s campaign when he was picked, along with Caroline Kennedy, to run the search for a vice-presidential nominee. He hasn’t wandered far since then. His decision to appoint a special investigator to look into the activities of the CIA under the Bush administration has proved controversial and run up against Obama’s pledge not to focus on the previous White House. Naming him to the bench could be a clever way of getting Holder out of the White House’s hair. Before joining the Obama administration as attorney general—the first African-American to hold the position—Holder worked for the Justice Department for 12 years. He was appointed to the bench as a Superior Court judge in D.C. by Ronald Reagan and made U.S. Attorney for the District by Bill Clinton in 1993. Subsequently, he served as Deputy Attorney General under Clinton.
Photo: Harry Hamburg / AP Photo
leoness1
Where's Harold Koh? In addition to being a brilliant liberal with much-needed expertise in international law, he, too, would be another "first": First Asian-American!
FreddySez
Wow, I'm sure you mean Holder has taken a tough "tack" against Bush.
The "please help us we need a copy editor so badly" entry must have dropped off your job listings page by accident.
pbasch
Good catch, honing in on that error. Oh... wait...
spotted
Give'em a break - at least it's spelled correctly.
The poor bastard probably grew up indoors in front of a computer and has never even seen a real boat, let alone sailed one.
Martyz42
Obama must pick a super liberal to replace a super liberal... Obama also needs to have one more in the bag for Ginsbergs replacement when she pulls the plug prior to 2012....
Adding two more woman to the bench would not only be a great idea for the bench but even Karl Rove could see the political advantage in the next election.... Wood number one & Kagan next would give the court 3 females, a great idea...
Adding Sunstein if one of the conservatives decides to call it quits would then bring the court closer to the 21st century...It might not also hurt if Obama had a special dinner at Camp David for Thomas & spent the evening trying to remind Thomas sho he really is, where he really came from & pretending to be a Confederate republican is no longer nessesary since he has gone as far as he can woith that gig...
GVidal
It must be Harold Koh - or Diane Woods - the ONLY two acceptable liberals.
Ethan Nakamora
I agree that Sunstein would be a good (read: compromise) replacement should a conservative justice retire etc. However, I doubt such considerations would be made if it were the other way around. Ergo I'm not sure I would go that route. I think it would come down to the composition of the Senate and who could get confirmed.
GVidal
Harold Koh or Diane Wood are the only two logical choices - Obama better not let us down on this appointment. EITHER "KOH or WOODS"
Thats it
tonyjenson
Frankly, I'd rather have a church-going old white man who goes hunting after monster truck rallies, but votes like a "Liberal Asian-American Environmentalist Lesbian with a pet-peeve for privacy rights."
I'm tired of superficial solutions.
jheightsgirl
What are you trying to say? Your eloquence may have escaped you. Or you don't have a cogent point.
tonyjenson
My point is that previous comments are about "checking boxes: Woman, Asian-American, etc. and not about balancing out the conservative bent of the Supreme Court.
The only way to get a liberal counterweight to Scalia-Thomas is to do what the right with Clarence Thomas: Get the most conservative African-American you can find and dare the left to vote against him.
Ethan Nakamora
tony I actually see your point on this. I personally would not got that route but I do see your point.
tonyjenson
And if his name could be Ronald Regan the Right's head would explode trying find something to culturally tar and feather him with.
morris1030
I would like to see another woman on the court to give it more balance.
We have only seen a short, short list for now.
Ethan Nakamora
Another person "missing" from this list is Janet Napolitano. She made it the finals the last time. I favor someone who had not served as judge or has at least not served on the federal bench.
Napolitano was an Attorney General and U.S. Attorney. She add diversity of experience. Plus we do need another women of the court.
I'm a big fan of Harold Koh too. He would be a great replacement for Ginsburg. But I worry he would not make it passed confirmation. He too adds diversity of experience having never served on the federal bench.
Ethan Nakamora
Another person "missing" from this list is Janet Napolitano. She made it to the final round the last time. I favor someone who has not served as a judge or has at least not served on the federal bench.
Napolitano was an Attorney General and U.S. Attorney. She adds diversity of experience. Plus we need another women on the court!
I'm a big fan of Harold Koh too. He would be a great replacement for Ginsburg. But I worry he would not make it past confirmation. He too adds diversity of experience having never served on the federal bench.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.