HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Politics & Government » Hillary Clinton (Group) » How many Supreme Court ju...

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:42 AM

How many Supreme Court justices is Hillary likely to nominate during her eight years as president?

Go ahead an include whoever she's going to nominate to fill Scalia's vacant seat ... I think it's unlikely that Obama's nominee will be confirmed.

I'm going to guess that she'll have to nominate four new justices (to fill seats left vacant by Scalia, Ginsberg, Kennedy and Thomas).

Ginsberg and Kennedy will retire. Thomas will be impeached or will have sudden health issues. (Just a guess.)



21 replies, 2182 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply How many Supreme Court justices is Hillary likely to nominate during her eight years as president? (Original post)
NurseJackie Jun 2016 OP
MADem Jun 2016 #1
NurseJackie Jun 2016 #5
BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #7
pandr32 Jun 2016 #10
BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #11
MADem Jun 2016 #8
Walk away Jun 2016 #2
jmowreader Jun 2016 #14
Walk away Jun 2016 #16
jmowreader Jun 2016 #17
Walk away Jun 2016 #18
George II Jun 2016 #3
LineReply 3
beachbum bob Jun 2016 #4
Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #6
Lil Missy Jun 2016 #9
Fla Dem Jun 2016 #12
NurseJackie Jun 2016 #13
Tarc Jun 2016 #15
Cha Jun 2016 #20
fleabiscuit Jun 2016 #19
Cha Jun 2016 #21

Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:49 AM

1. Obama's nominee might be confirmed after election day 2016.

The great fear will be that HRC will nominate someone Very Young and Very Liberal and maybe even Very Charismatic--and turn America against the Senate.

They'll like Obama's pick, looking at an incoming female POTUS with lots of political capital to spend, because he is a) Moderate and b) No Spring Chicken.

I'd love it if he ended up being a screeching closet liberal with a genetic code that included 110 year old grandparents!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:54 AM

5. You've got a point there ... but I'd read, or heard, elsewhere that ...

... at some point, Obama or Garland may withdraw the nomination from consideration and FORCE them to have to deal with someone appointed by Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:04 PM

7. Merrick Garland, a Scorpio, will not withdraw his nomination. He's a fighter. President Obama is a

man with incredible patience. Five months isn't a long time for Chief Judge Merrick Garland nor President Obama to wait, so I believe MADem is correct, that when it's clear Hillary Clinton is going to win the G.E. and Dems are poised to win back the Senate, and out of fear that she'll appoint a younger, more liberal candidate, the Repubs in the Senate will do a 180 and quickly confirm him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #7)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:59 PM

10. Good point

This is probably what will happen. Besides, there is nothing wrong with Garland other than he is pretty much in the middle. We Democrats don't need to pull everyone out of the far-left field like many would hope. The point is to reaffirm the dignity of the Supreme Court by filling it with appointees that use reason and not partisanship to guide them while deliberating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pandr32 (Reply #10)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 01:04 PM

11. Many excellent points, pandr! Thanks for highlighting them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:04 PM

8. And therein lies the perfect storm of a Master Threat!

By a Master Threatener, too! LOL!

I'm guessing they'll be given a "Last Chance, Schmucks" and they'll have to weigh if they want to deal with it now, or later. If a few key GOP toadies break ranks the rest will follow.

If that doesn't flip 'em, the next step is to "Name and Shame" the Senators who refuse to consider--that might be quite the PR campaign!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:50 AM

2. 3 seats for sure. I love your take on Thomas but could the country get that lucky???

So much for the "Roberts Court"!

Wouldn't it be great to put Barney Frank on the court. I think it would be brilliant to have a Justice who represents the LGBT community! That would be radical and awesome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 07:24 PM

14. Twenty years ago, it would have been great to put him on the court

He's 76 years old.

If you would like an LGBT justice, try:

Nitza I Quinones Alejandro (born 1951)
Alison Nathan (born 1972)
Paul Oetken (born 1965)
Michael Fitzgerald (born 1959)
Michael McShane (born 1961)
Pamela Ki Mai Chen (born 1961)

They're all openly-gay federal judges who are young enough to serve on the Court for decades.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/06/13/2151741/there-are-now-seven-times-as-many-openly-gay-federal-judges-as-when-president-obama-took-office/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #14)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 08:37 PM

16. Two of my college age nieces are lesbians, awesome and involved in politics.

I think it would be incredible to have an LGBT Justice. Imagine, instead of 9 judges deciding your rights, one of the nine is you!

Thanks for the list. I will study it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #16)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 08:49 PM

17. If I had to pick one, it would be McShane

McShane is the judge who struck down Oregon's same-sex marriage ban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geiger_v._Kitzhaber

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #17)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 08:59 PM

18. How cool is it that a gay Justice struck down a law against same-sex marriage!

Thanks again for this information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:50 AM

3. I think she'll nominate three, barring unforeseen health problems by any current members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:53 AM

4. 3

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:57 AM

6. The average is 2, I think 3. The House has the sole authority to impeach.

The Senate then tries the person impeached. The Republican House will never impeach Thomas.

Ginsberg, Kennedy, and Breyer are the most likely to retire in the next 4 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:50 PM

9. 4 maybe? Even 5? Thomas is not going to be impeached. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 03:36 PM

12. My musings on the Supreme Court

It doesn't look Turtle McConnell is going to allow a vote on President Obama's candidate Judge Garland. If he continues to obstruct, that's at least one spot the new pres (HRC) will get to appoint. Then based on age, I would guess there could be 2 more in the 1st term; RBG will be 87 at the end of the 1st term, Anthony Kennedy will be 83. But who know. RBG may stay until she's 90, and given the sudden death of Scalia, someone may go unexpectedly. The good thing is if HRC is the president, there is no way the senate can block her nominee to fill Scalia's spot. We still end up with a 5-4 center-left Supreme Court. (Merrick Garland is 63)

As much as I admire RBG I hope she retires before the end of the first term. Kennedy and/or Breyer retires. Then we have the possibility of at least 4-5 Justices that will be in their late 50's early 60's.

Sonia Sotomayor........61
Elena Kagan..............56
Pres Obama's or HRC's nominee to replace Scalia
Replacement for RBG sometime during the first term
Replacement for the retirement of Anthony Kennedy or Stephen Breyer

Hopefully all of the replacement candidates will be in their late 50's to early 60's.

We could have at least 5 relatively young center/left Supreme Court Justices.

If they stay in good health, they could dominate the SC for the next 20 years. Of course I am supposing all this with the expectation that HRC will be the next President.

The last 9 justices retired or died between the ages of 70-90.

Antonin Scalia............died at 80
Sandra Day O'Connor retired at 75
David Souter............retired at 70
John Paul Stevens.....retired at 90
William Rehnquist.........died at 81
Lewis Powell............. retired at 80
Harry Blackmun.........retired at 86
Warren Burger..........retired at 79
Thurgood Marshall.....retired at 83

Only 2 justices stayed beyond 85,

Age of current SC Justices

Anthony Kennedy........79......Ronald Reagan
Clarence Thomas........67......George H. W. Bush
Ruth Bader Ginsburg... 83.......Bill Clinton
Stephen Breyer...........77.......Bill Clinton
John G. Roberts..........61.......George W. Bush
Samuel A. Alito, Jr......66.......George W. Bush
Sonia Sotomayor........61.......Barack Obama
Elena Kagan..............56........Barack Obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #12)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 03:48 PM

13. Thanks for the detailed info ... that was interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #12)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 08:29 PM

15. Dammit, I thought Thomas was pushing mid-70's

He is just an awful, awful human being, but unfortunately looks to be sticking around another 10-15 years easily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #12)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 05:32 AM

20. That was interesting.. thank you, Fla Dem!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 11:45 PM

19. Six n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Original post)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 05:34 AM

21. I dunno.. but it was

interesting reading your thread by those who know things including you.

Mahalo, Jackie~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread