Obama describes what he'll look for when replacing David Souter
By David Neiwert Friday May 01, 2009 2:00pm
President Obama today interrupted the daily White House press briefing to talk about replacing David Souter on the Supreme Court:
Now, the process of selecting someone to replace Justice (David) Souter is among my most serious responsibilities as president, so I will seek somebody with a sharp and independent mind and a record of excellence and integrity. I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives, whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation. I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes. I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role. I will seek somebody who shares my respect for constitutional values on which this nation was founded and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time.
The Huffington Post has a lineup of the five most likely candidates.
On cue, the wingnuts (led by Malkin) are lining to scream, wail, tear out their hair, gnash their teeth, and do all those things wingnuts do reflexively, but with the added enjoyment of being completely impotent and irrelevant.
Meanwhile, white male Villagers like Mark Halperin are whining over the likelihood that the nominee will be neither white nor male, or at least not both. Of course, isn't William Ayers a white male? How much, exactly, do those attributes really matter?
It's like Dylan sez: "It's wonder that you still know how to breathe."
Login or Register to post comments.
there's a lot of chatter regarding the supreme court potential nominees. beyond the obvious we need someone that understands/honors the constitution. we need a liberal......please mr. president.
We DESPERATELY need a liberal.
*
misspelled what we desperately need. The correct spelling is Libertarian.
And, given Obama's demonstrated shallow regard for the Constitution thus far (FISA, Faith -Based Initiatives, attempting to reserve imagined prerogatives of the so-called "Unitary Executive" for himself) and his equally shallow regard for the rule of law ("I believe in moving forward", instead of holding arch-criminals accountable for their crimes and atrocities), I don't get a good feeling. Thus far, he's shown contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law. If he extends that performance into picking Supreme Court justices (and federal judges, for that matter) it may well as be Bush still doing the picking. There won't be any qualitative difference.
He/she better be pro-choice, pro-environment, and anti-torture. In other words, the exact opposite of Scalia.
as we react to them reacting. Meanwhile back at reality ranch gird yourselves for supreme disappointment.
The Republican m.o. has been to nominate people who are: 1. pro-business arch-conservatives, and 2. young enough to stay on the court for 30 years or more. Obama fails if he doesn't look to counter that.
President Obama, just call up Jonathan Turley. Trust me on this one.
won't have time for Turley if he's consulting with Kissinger.
The Pugs would be apoplectic. It would be good theater, and he'd make an excellent choice.
then how does consulting with Scalia grab you.
...was born to be put on the Supreme Court. If there was any justice in the world, it would be Turley sitting as Chief Justice, instead of the fascist, neandrethal throwback Roberts.
Appoint a flaming sandal wearing long haired beared librul with a daisy chain!
I would love to see Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly all spontaneously combust over it! Not to mention the reaction of that arrogant, regressive, bloated, cannoli eating, Scalia's reaction to it.
Is Angela Davis still around??
The reports of her demise are premature.
Last I saw, she was teaching at University of Virginia.
I propose Bill Ayres - just for the grins :)
heads of a whole weekend of putting words in his mouth by putting out his own statement first.
It'll be greatly amusing to watch the Republicans contort themselves like pretzels to justify why "a simple up or down vote" is no longer the fair and reasonable thing to do.
I had to look at the clip twice.... the first time, I realized, I was still so amazed to have a president who is intelligent, articulate, thoughtful, considerate, and dignified, I just listened without hearing. Second time I got the message.... Sounds like a good profile he is looking for... question is: where do you get someone like that who is also young...
Pat Buchanan and Monica Fembot, I mean Crowley, ought to be fun on McLaughin Report tonight.
wasnt his saying hed pick someone who would honor our constitution just so much horse shit? even obama doesnt honor the constitution , as it was before he voted for fisa ect ect!
Yeah, I'm still pissed about that vote. And his hands off policy toward the Bush administration and the Wall Street robber barons. He doesn't seem to have the will or courage to hold anyone responsible for crimes against America and the world. That's my greatest disappointment in him. You just can't send the message that if you rise to the highest levels of government and industry you're immune from prosecution. That's dangerous to our democracy.
there is no democracy.
!
ACTIVIST JUDGE ALERT!! ACTIVIST JUDGE ALERT!! DANGER-DANGER-DANGER!!
Yessir, the wingnuts are going to be flying high, now. They're going to get terminal tongue cramps from all of the screaming and blathering and carrying on. Can't wait to watch.
It was so funny when the President walked into Gibbs press briefing and began to speak. He was teasing Gibbs about the kind of job he was doing.
David, I picked up your book, The Eliminationists, this afternoon and I'm 42 pages in.
One word: Excellent!
And nice photo on the back though somehow I thought you were taller. :-)
It's easy to imagine brave people as having a powerful physical presence.
*
Re-Thugs do NOT get to have a say in picking a replacement for Souter.
They can scream all they want, bang their heads and fists against the wall. They can throw their spoiled little rotten selves to the floor and howl and kick their feet and hold their breath until they turn blue. They can and will poop their nappies -- but . . .
THEY DON'T GET TO SAY.
*
like when they had a say when Clinton did, and like the Dems did when Bush and Reagan appointed judges. Also the Dems do not have a filibuster proof majority without Franken being seated. Also even with a liberal replacement of Souter will not change the political makeup of the court. Chances are baring any unforeseen changes, the makeup will stay the same until the next presidential election at least. The five mainly conservative judges on the court will most likely stay.
The only names of possible nominee's that I recognized on NPR this morning was Jennifer Granholm
I'd like to see any combination of the following three -- A woman, a black, or a hispanic.
They had damned well better be a liberal to moderate.
*
Fran Townsend? Condoleeza Rice? Mrs. Alberto Gonzales? Really?
That sounds nice and all, but I'll be waiting to see who he finally picks. Like I said...we shall see.
Lets make her a supreme court judge.
bhwhaaaaaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaa! what a tool!the wife of the president of the united states being a judge on the supreme court might seem to be ..............nepotism. at the very least! heh heh!
That was the reason I voted for Obama instead of Green or Socialist parties.
Now we will see...
Blue dogs, blue dogs, can you say blue dogs?
Metrosexual zionist bluedogs.
You lost me on that one.
My criteria:
1.Intellectual brilliance.Must be able to demonstrate this in a public setting.
2.Known to be to the left of all current justices.With his nomination, I want the right to scream communist and not be far off.
3.Hispanic- to break a tie.
Even if he picks Rush Limpballs, the blogs will be aflutter of undying support and loyalty from the Dem faithful. It'll be some grandiose plan of course, because deep down Obama is either liberal, or the smartest man on the face of the Earth, and he'll have an awesome plan. Similar to those tax cuts that only Republicans give, the corporate bailouts that only Republicans do, the full support of the Iraq invasion that only Republicans do, the massive debt budgets that only Republicans do.......etc, etc, etc.....Nopers. Democratic Party supporters are absolutely right. No way Obama is anything like a Republican president. Bwahahaha hahahaha.
those blinders snugly in place. And always remember children, as Obama says to all you homeless and 665,000/per month unemployed and his direct personal message to the people of this nation:
"Don't max out your credit cards, wash your hands and cover your mouth when you cough"
...and spay and neuter your pets.
perhaps souter could sugest his own replacement ! im sure it would be taken under advisement ,
of course your right concernedcanuck and i like your laugh on the irony of it all!
....the omni-dimensional chass master who has a deep plan for everything.
As I said before I only want President Obama to pick somebody who is as far left as Alito and Roberts are to the right. Having said that I understand that William Ayers may not be eligible because he is not a lawyer but I think that his wife could be eligible and between them they could act as a team. Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers would be a fabulous choice. A woman, as far left as Alito is right and you get a twofer.
Can Obama pick himself?
He only does that when nobody's looking.
In all seriousness, however, if the choice must absolutely be another white male, I would support Jonathan Turley.
I hope that whoever is picked will be a defender of a woman's right to reproductive choice and health, and a defender of civil liberties.
JT would be fulfillment with a bow on top. Have we seen yet a single appointment yet with that resonance, that deep sensibility?
Now I'm going to stop this after I tell you what I suspect will happen:
A big nasty lump of coal in our stockings we can use for warmth.
Michele Obama.
Her royal highness would make an excellent judge! Perhaps it would be more appropriate than wearing almost $600 sneakers while pretending to care for the poor!
Snore.
Obama could not have said anything less controversial if he tried! He wants a justice who has a heart! THIS can raise the ire of conservatives? Remember the last words of the Wicked Witch of the West? It is the Battle Cry of the Republicans--"We are shrinking! We are shrinking!"
"...We'll get you and your little dog!"
"...We'll get you and your little dog!"
It is all the same. They are the wicked witch, at any rate.
Let's not forget young and healthy. We need this person to last awhile.
David (or site monitor), really wish you would put up the entire clip where Obama walks in and surprises Robert Gibbs and the press corps. I thoroughly enjoy his humor (and humility) when he tells the standing-out-of-respect press corps to be seated. He understands the power of the office he is in and is determined not to be overwhelmed by it.
I'm liking this gentle man more and more. Somewhat Kennedy-esque, but with a touch of Lincoln and Will Rogers.
Now, the process of selecting someone to replace Justice (David) Souter is among my most serious responsibilities as president, so I will seek somebody with a sharp and independent mind and a record of excellence and integrity.
Sounds good to me
I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives, whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation.
Sounds good for lower courts, for SCOTUS should be a strict constitutional interpretation, not worrying about anything else.
I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.
I prefer feelings not effect supreme court rulings.
I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role.
Again no problem at all with this.
I will seek somebody who shares my respect for constitutional values on which this nation was founded and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time.
I'm sorry I don't think the constitution needs any "thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time" It was written to be understood by the common man. And should be interpreted as such. If it needs changed, it should be done so through amendments, not through twisting what it says to fit todays views.
Login or Register to post comments.