Supreme Speculation
The upcoming retirement of Justice David Souter has led to lots of speculation about the next Supreme. We held a poll here at ATL, including some of the potential nominees that have been mentioned most often by the legal press. Almost 10,000 ATL readers put Sonia Sotomayor, with 28% of the vote, and Elena Kagan, with 20% of the vote, at the top of their list (see full results after the jump).
Obama says he wants a Supreme with empathy. Given that, Clerquette at Underneath Their Robes asks whether the smart money is on solicitor general and ex-Harvard dean Elena Kagan:
The question of course, is which judicial fox will occupy the Souter seat. As you know, our/ATL’s leaderboard points to General Kagan and Judge Sotomayor as front-runners. But, while some Court-watchers (and POTUS fans) are unabashedly agog at the possibility of the “diversity double” that would be accomplished by Judge Sotomayor’s nomination, a few interesting rumblings to the contrary have emerged. Point I: a number of commenters, including Adam Liptak of the New York Times, have pointed out that the notion of promoting “diversity” amongst the Supremes requires both consideration of personal characteristics and credentials and a good, hard look at the presumptive nominees’ path to power. Given the homogeneity of the current bench, which consists entirely of former federal judges (who are, admittedly, irresistible!), might POTUS seize this opportunity to mix it up a little? He has, after all, identified Justice Earl Warren as his personal judicial dreamboat, citing Justice Warren’s political background and the pragmatism with which it infused his juristic decision-making.But wait: there’s more! In an article so chock-full of Article III gossip that Clerquette read much of it while breathing into a paper bag (narrowly avoiding a dramatic swoon) esteemed law professor Jeffrey Rosen writes that Judge Sotomayor may not be quite ready for prime time. Although she gets high marks for sass and biographical appeal — not insignificant qualities — Rosen reports that some have raised doubts about her strength on the merits. For example, he writes, many of his sources have “expressed questions about her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative.” Gasp! Juicier yet, Rosen quotes a former Second Circuit clerk who opined that Sotomayor was “‘not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench.’” The clerk also noted that Judge Sotomayor had what sound (to this blogress) like patent indicia of divadom: specifically, said the clerk, “She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren’t penetrating and don’t get to the heart of the issue.”
Wow, Professor Rosen, don’t hold back. Those are strong words, and are getting some strong reactions. Glenn Greenwald at Salon excoriated Rosen for the attack piece.
In our initial post, we proposed an unofficial “David Lat to SCOTUS” campaign. You all came up with some interesting suggestions as well. More speculation on Souter’s replacement, and some dark horse candidates, after the jump.
Justice Souter will be missed. Check out this nice round-up, by SCOTUSblog, of the other Supremes’ statements in response to his resignation announcement.
Linda Greenhouse, former Supreme Court reporter for the NYT, said in an interview that folks shouldn’t leap to conclusions:
[M]y expectation is that the administration is going to cast a wide-net for candidates and there’s not been enough discussion about the desirability of someone like another Sandra Day O’Connor…Talking heads are too quickly jumping to conclusions on this and I really think there’s something to putting a politician in this spot — someone like Janet Napolitano who was just confirmed [as Secretary of Homeland Security], and has already been through a vigorous vetting process.
Did Greenhouse just endorse Napolitano or just someone like her?
As you all know, at this point, we’re just playing the waiting and rampant analysis game, as Biden draws up a list of nominees for Obama to review. Who will be on that list? Kagan? Sotomayor? Napolitano????
Here’s some folks who probably won’t make the cut, but who would make the list Biden sends to Obama a bit more fun. From ATL commenters:
Better candidates:Eliot Spitzer
Sarah Palin (in “Team of Rivals” spirit)
Alan Stanford (not charged with any crime)
Harriet Miers
Jessica Simpson
1. Bill Clinton
2. Judge Judy
how many clerks do you think bill clinton would nail???
Karl Rove
It is undeniable that a vagina is a primary qualification for the SCOTUS. That just makes sense. However, some women have a condition called didelphic uterus, which results in - wait for it - TWO vaginas.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/article344794.ece
Can you imagine the power of a two-vaginaed Justice? She would be undefeatable in the political correctness rock-paper-scissor calculations made in modern liberal thought, where her double barreled crotch shotgun would double not only her female qualifications, but perhaps even count as a physical disability. Can you imagine?! Better still, if we were able to find such a woman who was of a pre-approved minority (African-American, Hispanic, and/or Native American), her qualifications would stack up like some sort of fucking appointee Voltron.
I hereby petition Obama to divert all funds not previously diverted from National Defense into searching for such a candidate and, if possible, somehow wrestling her overpowered frame into a cage for shipment to the SCOTUS.
Hmmmm, we don’t imagine any of those will make Biden’s list. Here are the results of the poll that included more likely SCOTUS contenders:
SCOTUS Leaderboard: Is the Smart Money on Kagan? [Underneath Their Robes]
Three Questions for Linda Greenhouse on Obama’s Supreme Court pick [True/Slant]
The Case Against Sotomayor [The New Republic]
Obama Has Chance to Select Justice With Varied Résumé [New York Times]
Jeffrey Rosen, TNR and the anonymous smears against Sonia Sotomayor [Salon]
Statements from the Supreme Court on Justice Souter [SCOTUS Blog]
Earlier: ATL Poll: Who Should Replace SCOTUS Justice David Souter?
(103) Comments
Comments
Section 90 Promissory Estoppel
The ship be sinking
The dow is up/down
YOU ARE ALL IDIOTS
Pounding something in the ass.
3500 sq ft, wife, etc.
Nervous. T10.
Guys at my high school used to . . .
Asslobster.
Quinn remains.
Limerick/poem.
Dealbreaker ad blows. No it doesn't. Yes, it does.
PE (foot inserted in mouth after being in rear)
Anything > Latham
Your spelling/grammar sucks.
FAIL
What did Latham say to Watkins? Let’s hire Bob Dell after we die so he can run the firm into the ground.
Shtick Guy is missing "FIRE ELIE!"
Latham is so gay, when they were moving to New York, they decided they just had to rent offices in the Lipstick building.
A poem I wrote for laid off Lathamites. Don't get down. The world is your oyster and you'll come out of this for the better.
-------------------------------
Standing Tall
By LL
Sometimes the world looks perfect: Nothing to rearrange.
Sometimes you just, get a feeling like you need some kind of change.
No matter what the odds are this time, nothing’s going to stand in my way.
This flame in my heart, and a long lost friend.
Gives every dark street a light at the end.
Standing tall, on the wings of my dream.
Rise and fall, on the wings of my dream.
The rain and thunder. The wind and haze.
I’m bound for better days. It’s my life and my dream,
Nothing’s going to stop me now.
Why not Lat's favorite Ninth Circuit Judge, Marsha Berzon?. Female. Solid liberal credentials. Not too old. Clerked for Brennan, who was replaced by Souter. Judicial experience. Whether you disagree with her or not, her opinions are well crafted and anyaltically sound. Practical experience as a litigator for years. Berzon.
Rosen's article is embarrassing and just makes GW look bad. Hasn't GW suffered enough this spring?
5 - Latham PR effort.
I nominate Mr. Morning Wood.
Shtick guy needs the tongue-in-cheek "NY to 190!"
There goes that X-Lathamite again telling the whole legal village "Look, I pissed my panties."
11, who are you exactly? Latham PR? This blog is for attorneys
What we need is a black female who has never practiced or served on the bench, and who aspires to solve all social and political problems from her seat on the High Court. As they used to say in the 1960s, if it feels good then do it. What the Constitution anyway, other than another piece of old paper.
No, shtick guy needs to stop posting. Shit is weak.
Yawn. I stopped caring about the supemes when i graduated from law school.
Latham SUUUCCCKKKS
shtick guy also forgot 1st (or some variation - firsty, pretzels, third?)...which isnt really a shtick but an annoying repetitive post
That two vaginas post is the funniest shit I've ever read on this blog.
Anita Hill
Why is Leah Ward Sears not on the list?
Everyone read TNR's The Case Against Sotomayor, never support a Judge who abuses her clerks!
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085
There goes that X-Lathamite telling the whole legal village "Look, I pissed my panties, AGAIN."
Greewald is an idiot.
19 wins. Perfect nominee.
Mystal to SCotUS.
I'll drink to that.
-Pop Bottles
"Look, I pissed my panties. AGAIN."
So Latham PR is sexist too, huh? You not only make fun of your laid-off employees, but you suggest that they wear panties because that makes them weaker?
I am looking for some sweet CWT 05 female associate ass to pound. If anyone knows of any, please let me know.
Prime Rib
There goes that X-Lathamite telling the whole legal village "Look, I pissed my panties, AGAIN."
http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/05/sympathetic_interpretations.php
Pretty obvious that Clerquette is Kash. Both Kash and Clerquette attended the Posner event in NYC a few days ago. Nothing here about it, but it made UTR. And now this non-Lat plug for A3G. Nice work.
26 - Is that how you feel when you put on your panties?
31-
26 here. That was a pretty lame comment. Are you specifically tasked to LaTTTham damage control?
32 - Calling the kettle black. If the panties fit...
Am I racist if I enjoy pounding my secretary in the ass?
He is likely not going to get a hard core liberal through the nomination process. According to Senate confirmation rules, a judge to be considered by the full body must get 10 yeses from the Judiciary Committee including at least one member of the opposing party. In the past, that would have been Specter but ... opps, he isn't a member of the GOP anymore so the GOP can play hard ball on this issue to get someone at least more middle of the road or to their liking at least.
22, 31, 33...AKA Latham's PR machine. No need to feel like you are pushing my buttons with the panties comments. I'm not even an "X-Lathamite" or whatever.
What you have established: Latham promotes sexism.
Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears is such an obvious choice....and yet, ATL doesn't even discuss her.
Elizabeth Warren to SCOTUS?
I took civil procedure from Elena Kagan while in law school.
Tangibles: she's highly accomplished, funny and straightforward.
Intangibles: Obama taught at UC during the same period, and he and Kagan, as smokers, gathered with others behind UC's law school on occasion for a nicotine break.
36 - How do those wet panties feel, honey?
I took civil procedure from Elena Kagan while in law school.
Tangibles: she's highly accomplished, funny and straightforward.
Intangibles: Obama taught at UC during the same period, and he and Kagan, as smokers, gathered with others behind UC's law school on occasion for a nicotine break. The fraternity among smokers should never be underestimated.
lattham=sexist
I thought that Kagan quit smoking?
42 = X-Latham Panty Pissing Crier
Will you blow me where the PAMPERS IS?
44, your obsession can take root here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL633sdqlEw
Another benefit of a two vaginaed Justice ("TVJ") is that, since we all agree that a vagina is the most relevant organ when it comes to qualifications, the TVJ has a pretty good argument for receiving two votes. This would lend more power to the liberal wing of the court. But to keep things interesting that's no guarantee, since it's also possible the vaginas might occasionally vote against each other on particularly divisive issues. Faced with the prospect of hilarious decisions in which the minority vagina files dissents against the majority vagina, the showman in Obama will not refuse the nomination. The man is about 40% P.T. Barnum already; it's time to go the distance. America has limped along with mono-vagina Justices for far too long. The 21st century demands a modern Justice. TVJ is truly change we can believe in.
p.s. ATL - if you think Joe Biden would pass up an opportunity to spend time with a two vaginaed woman, you obviously haven't passed by the intersection of Marsh St. and East 14th in Wilmington at about 2:30 am.
13 - that's right! Let's roll back Brown et al!!!
47- awesome
I agree that Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears should be on the list. I have appeared before her and watched several others argue before her, and she has impressed me every time. She would make a fantastic SCOTUS justice.
45 - You prefer that I bend you over and Latham you.
Lets not forget that the nominee has to be a person of faith. And not just any faith.
B'hai's need not apply.
Hindu won't do.
Islam, Sikh, Zoroastrian, Rastafarian: all toast.
ooooh #2, no you di-uhnt
Elie for SCOTUS. Then, you will truly be above the law.
Elie for SCOTUS. Then, you will truly be above the law.
45- did they specifically task you to damage control because there is no work to do at LaTTTham?
Obama: After due consideration, I hereby nominate Clark Wilhelm Griswold, Jr. for SCOTUS.
45 - Are you still running around with those wet panties on?
The Latham PR guy is only making it worse for Latham. You continue to mention Latham's name and drug it though the mud. The more you say latham, the worse it is for you. As such, I think you should be fired. I'll send an email to Dave Gordon.
58 was for 56. I guess Latham flicked you off like pooh, didn't they?
What did Latham say to Watkins? Let’s hire Bob Dell after we die so he can run the firm into the ground.
There goes that X-Lathamite telling the whole legal village "Look, I pissed my panties, AGAIN."
Pooh bear?
If you have any poo, fling it now!
The Latham PR guy is only making it worse for Latham. You continue to mention Latham's name and drug it though the mud. The more you say latham, the worse it is for you. As such, I think you should be fired. I'll send an email to Dave Gordon.
"There goes that X-Lathamite telling the whole legal village 'Look, I pissed my panties, AGAIN.'"
Does this even make any sense? Look legal village, I'm incontinent! Woohoo!
You showed me.
63 - small p like insignificant
65 - There goes that X-Lathamite telling the whole legal village "Look, I pissed my panties, AGAIN."
He is not Latham PR guy. I know for a fact what Latham does not have a PR department. He is probably a stupid ass summer coming to us in a few weeks. Don't defend that you don't know.
current associate who will jump ship as soon as business picks up
68 - Don't bother, they will flick you off soon enough
Wurtzel for SCOTUS
66 - Obviously another X-Lathamite.
LaTTTham
There goes that X-Lathamite telling the whole legal village "Look, I pissed my panties, AGAIN."
why does 73 think that is so clever.
dude, it's stupid
74 - Do you miss Latham?
why does 73 think that is so clever.
dude, it's stupid
74- I am sure Latham is lamenting over losing you. If I don't post for the next few hoursit is because I have another filing to the U.S. Supreme Court, so dry out your panties and I will get back with you.
re: Leah Ward Sears
I think she is a good choice, but would have been even better if her parents had named her Penny, or better yet, J.C. Penney.
J.C. Penney Ward Sears sounds like someone who could empathize with middle America.
If the elitists had their way, of course, the next justice would have a name more like Marcus Neimann Saks, or Lord Taylor Bloomingdale.
LaTTTham and WaTTTkins
Kagan is a lesbian. Obama doesn't have the backbone or stomach for nominating a lesbian and the fight that would entail.
For those who know New York law, Sotomayor is like Ciparick. There are better people for the post, including minority women.
Oh, sorry... I have another filing to the U.S. Supreme Court. I guess I need to stop trash talking LaTTTham.
It is absolutely absurd that people say such ridiculous things and then they catch on and are printed.
So Rosen attacks Sotomayor because she's not smart and is worried about her the structure of her judicial opinions -- fine. But, show some examples. What opinions in particular? We are supposed to just believe some GW Law professor that someone sitting on the 2nd Circuit is intellectually inferior to him and other candidates because he says so? Please stop perpetuating this trash. It's unbecoming and it's exactly what the conservatives want.
To the same person posting at 20, 37 and 50. She shouldn't be on SCOTUS.
It's a lock that she'll be on the Eleventh soon. That's bad enough. Did you even read the Genarlo Wilson opinion? While I entirely agree with the outcome, it was _horribly_ written. There is no excuse for that, given the outrageous national attention to the issue, unless she's just that bad of a writer. She's gotten better at everything with age, and practice, but she does not belong on SCOTUS.
Don't root for her to be appointed just because you're clerking for her (or have clerked for her in the past).
It's SotomayOr not -meyer. Fix the top part of the OP.
The Latham PR guy sounds pathetic and stupid. Buddy, areyou 5 years old or retarded? Repeating same shit all over again does not win the argument.
BTW - Latham has no Supreme Court practice to speak off after Mahoney left.
@47,
Pretty strong follow up to your legendary TVJ Voltron post. But even so, you were better off just to soak up the "comment of the year" award you were entitled to and then walk away.
Always leave em wanting more. Look at what happened to PE.
Wood is the most intelligent of all of the nominees, by far. She was a SCOTUS clerk, graduated summa from UT, and she manages to stick out next to Posner and Easterbrook (two of the smartest CoA judges).
All of the rest may be women, but they're just not as qualified. Kagan is too young, and doesn't have time on the bench.
BARNEY FRANK FOR SUPREME COURT !!!!!!
88: Whatever. Clarence Thomas was 42 at time of his appointment; Roberts was just 50; Kagan is 49. Kagan is well within the age parameters for the appointment; you're obviously a UT-Austin troll.
Kagan would be great; she's smart, she works well with entrenched factions, and she can articulate a clear constitutional countervision to Scalia.
That said, my own personal preference would be Hillary Rodham Clinton. Clinton would be a superb pick, has tremendous intellect and real world experience, and would bring a practical judgment to bear on the Supreme Court's work. I also wonder if the prospects of infinite "Fridays with Hillary" might lead Scalia or Thomas to consider retiring and earning some serious coin on the right wing speakers' tour. . . The thought of them spending hour upon hour with HRC in close quarters is a prospect devoutly to be wished!
(.) (.)
Unlikely to happen, she has diabetes.
Republicans picked young activist conservatives who can/will influence the court for decades. Why would the Dems pick someone with a considerably decreased life span? Only opens up the possible seat to a Republican president sooner.
The same might be said for the smoker, but maybe not if she quit.
Obama should appoint some left wing activist recent Yale Law grad and let them spend 70 years on the bench.
Unlikely to happen, she has diabetes.
Republicans picked young activist conservatives who can/will influence the court for decades. Why would the Dems pick someone with a considerably decreased life span? Only opens up the possible seat to a Republican president sooner.
The same might be said for the smoker, but maybe not if she quit.
Obama should appoint some left wing activist recent Yale Law grad and let them spend 70 years on the bench.
37 - maybe her Emory School of Law credentials have something to do with that.
Sotomayor and Kagan are two of the least attractive women I have ever seen.
Kagan - guaranteed to be Obama's second nomination to the court. By then, barring an unexpected death, she will have 1 year as SG, which with her other credentials will get past the 'no judiciary experience' critique. He just put her up as SG, so she has already been vetted. Plus he can nominate another woman now. Then, with Ginsburg the most likely to go next due to health reasons, he can nominate Kagan with get the court back to 2 woman members (maybe three if someone departs before Ginsburg).
86, Mahoney is still on LW's website. Is she leaving?
Leah Ward Sears
Latham is loosing their Paris office already.
http://www.legalweek.com/Articles/1197991/Winston+taps+Latham+for+Paris+litigation+team.html
LOL @ "her qualifications would stack up like some sort of fucking appointee Voltron"
Kash to SCOTUS!!!
That poll needs a "none of the above" option.
They didn't put my nominee in the poll!
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=k2olcg&s=5
90, I really hope you're joking. Clinton would be the worst SCOTUS appointment ever made. Didn't she fail the bar on her first go around... There is no way in hell that she could ever match judicial wit with someone like Scalia. The nominee really needs to be someone with a strong/consistent philosophy of how a SCOTUS justice should decide juticiable matters - I can guarantee that isn't Hillary.