General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWho would you like to see as the president's next Supreme Court nominee?
We don't know when it's going to come, but it will.
So who would you like to see chosen?
lapislzi
(5,762 posts)Autumn Colors
(2,379 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Autumn Colors
(2,379 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)napkinz
(17,199 posts)I'm glad she won her senate seat.
But I was thinking, Bill Clinton as my second choice.
(Wouldn't that be something ... if in 2016 we had Hillary as president and Bill on the Supreme Court.)
GoneOffShore
(17,339 posts)Definitely thought about Hilary though. Though the problem of having a family on the court could raise some issues.
And I think Hilary would be the better choice. Appoint Bill to be the "Explainer in Chief".
fredamae
(4,458 posts)Bernie Sanders for SCOTUS
Bill as Secy of State
BlueMan Votes
(903 posts)especially when one is as old as hillary will be in 2016.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)napkinz
(17,199 posts)First, why do you think America is not ready for an all female ticket?
Second, I think Reagan was 70 when he won in 1980. Hillary would be 69 in 2016. And women live longer.
BlueMan Votes
(903 posts)it's not necessarily about an exact age- unfortunately, in the u.s. it's more about appearance, and Hillary is already looking fairly haggard.
as to why that is... i don't know why so many would have voted for rmoney , either- but the answer is probably the same for both of them.
trof
(54,256 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)live forever.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)THAT would cause RW heads to explode for sure.
BootinUp
(47,154 posts)Yeah!
Tutonic
(2,522 posts)Sorry, I couldn't resist that one.
napkinz
(17,199 posts)Jerry Springer!
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)Hillary -or Bill - Clinton would be great too!
ananda
(28,862 posts)..
TheMightyFavog
(13,770 posts)We need him to run against Scott Walker in 2014!
Myrina
(12,296 posts)... I think until his pet project of Campaign Finance Reform is firmly back in charge & Citizens United is gone, dear Mr. Feingold doesn't want to play the campaigning/fundraising game.
Let's get him on SCOTUS where he can help make things right!!
jerseygal
(67 posts)Making the Supreme Court look like the rest of America.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Tennessee Gal
(6,160 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,457 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Young. Female. African-American/Asian American. Super smart. A staunch consumer advocate.
She would be PERFECT as U.S. Supreme Court Justice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)She would probably make a good politician with her people skills. But she's young and that's important in a Justice.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Case in point: AG Harris had worked tirelessly to get CA the most amount of dollars in the mortgage settlement, but had to watch as Gov. Brown used the $415+ billion to plug the budget deficit hole instead - very much to her angry disagreement.
Currently, according to Stephanie Miller, the Republicans have lost seats in our legislature and come January they will be completely powerless. They won't be able to filibuster bills like OneCare (medicare for all, California style) or block the effort to finally tax oil companies that are extracting CA oil from CA coasts and lands (we're the only oil state that doesn't assess taxes on oil companies, and its costing us $7 billion a year in revenue!), and stop giving tax breaks to corporations that are here but send their jobs outside of our borders. I'm watching closely if he'll make any move toward those very progressive, pro-CA policies.
Currently, all I see Brown doing is tax CA residents more and more. That's why I voted against Prop 30 that would raise taxes on Californians to fund schools. Why do we Californians, who are already so overtaxed, have to pay more out of our pay check while he could easily get the revenue he needs for schools by working toward policies addressing the above?
Still, I would love to see her as SCOTUS justice because she's only 48 (2 years younger than I) and she could serve for a long, long time, countering Roberts' and the Cons' influence.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)We need a younger justice to remain LONG after we get rid of Scalia and Kennedy in order to stop the Con agenda from being automatically stamped for approval by this ultra-conservative court.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)...I'm sure there are several out there that I've never heard of.
DonRedwood
(4,359 posts)The court needs that I think. A Democratic African American instead of Thomas.
Hutzpa
(11,461 posts)challenge his skewered views. Someone to go head on with him on issues pertaining to African Americans.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)look about her.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)to put herself forward as an U.S. Supreme Court Justice with a lifetime position, or be governor of CA with term limits, I believe she'll go for the lifetime position where she can wield REAL power.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)MinM
(2,650 posts)It'll never happen now that she's such a partisan presence (even though she was a moderate as Michigan's Gov). She was a very good attorney general.
Ganja Ninja
(15,953 posts)A great choice.
A lot of people say 'No way too partisan" but the GOP will say that no matter who they nominate.
JustAnotherGen
(31,827 posts)But I hope sometime after 2017 we have a Constitutional Law Professor who has served as Commander in Chief in in that role . . . He's going to be a VERY young man in terms of SCOTUS tenure when he leaves office.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)But then again, his powerful campaign strategy could be put to use getting more Democratic presidents, senators, and Representatives elected in the coming years because I'm pretty darn sure now that he's won re-election, Kennedy and Scalia are going to sit tight in their seats until a Republican president is in the WH even though they're already "up there" (both are 76 years old).
Look what Rehnquist did. He had to croak in order to get off his bench as he struggled with his health while waiting for a Con in the WH to replace him. Lucky for him (not so much for the country), the GOP stole both elections to facilitate that with Duhbya Bush.
JustAnotherGen
(31,827 posts)But what's the average life span of a white American male? Especially when their heart was bitter and dark from the day they were born?
Ooops! No filter! I did it again!
BlueMan Votes
(903 posts)Progressive dog
(6,904 posts)Young is important on the court where appointments are for life. Female is important to give gender balance to the court.
agentS
(1,325 posts)That's whom I would LIKE to see. Hey, a guy can dream, right?
Failing that, maybe we could promote someone from the 9th Circuit. They tend to make good decisions.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)OmahaBlueDog
(10,000 posts)Two reasons:
1) She's in the same basic age range as Kagan and Sotomayor, and was a Cliton appointee.
2) She's NOT an ivy league grad -- it's time for some non-ILers to get onto the court.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)He's 61 (i.e., young enough) and good at coming down on corruption. We need that.
pscot
(21,024 posts)Bader-Ginsberg's seat will likely go to someone Jewish.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)IIRC, Justice Breyer is also Jewish and Justice Kagan definitely is.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Someone who has excelled in the field of law and is admired by their peers for their wisdom.
That is who I want to see.
I don't think the SC appointments should be given to career politicians, and certainly don't want a justice being seated with an agenda and/or axe to grind.
Several people have mentioned Bill and Hillary. I don't think either would stand a chance getting Senate confirmation.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)I trust my president. I wouldn't presume to offer a choice.
Sorry, there is usually at least one of these kinds of replies in threads like this, so wanted to get it out of the way.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)but that answer is the correct one.
Retrograde
(10,137 posts)A little more variety in educational backgrounds would be nice - I hear U. of Chicago used to have a decent constitutional law teacher Someone who practices west of the Hudson would be nice as well. Kamala Harris would be an interesting choice, but as she comes from liberal San Francisco it would be a hard confirmation hearing.
calimary
(81,281 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Bake
(21,977 posts)And I didn't go to an Ivy League law school ... but I'm smart, tough, and I'd be damn good! And Mrs. Bake says I'm brilliant.
Just sayin' ... I could send the Prez a resume ...
Bake
white_wolf
(6,238 posts)I'll settle for someone who has been heavily influenced by Rawls.
retread
(3,762 posts)librechik
(30,674 posts)nt
Hutzpa
(11,461 posts)last time i wanted Diane Woods, but got Sotomayor which is not a bad choice either. Will be looking for more names to throw into the hat.