RUMOR: Bush floating idea for new Chief Justice

[teke184 0]

This has only been reported on Drudge so far, so it's purely rumor for now.

 

 

President Bush has asked for a report that will review the pros and cons of naming Clarence Thomas to be the new Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court once William Rehnquist retires or dies.

 

Thomas, in his 50s, is one of the youngest and most conservative judges on the court and his Senate approval in the early 90s was ugly due to allegations of sexual harassment by a former employee.

 

If Thomas becomes Cheif Justice, he'll be the first minority to hold that position in the history of the court.

 

Current thinking says that Rehnquist, currently being treated for thyroid cancer, will be off of the bench within a year.

 

 

 

The big question is how much of Bush's political capital does he want to spend on appointing Thomas to be the Chief Justice instead of bringing a newcomer onto the court and directly into the Chief Justice position.

 

The Chief Justice must be approved by the Senate even if they're already a member of the court and past precedent is that an outsider will be brought in to be the Chief Justice rather than promoting someone from within.

 

(All three elevations within the court have been since 1910, with Rehnquist being the most recent to do so. The last person before him to do so was Harlan Stone, who was elevated in 1941 by FDR)

[therealworldschampion 0]

Expect much bitching from Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton about it

[The Czech Republic 0]

I don't wanna hear about pubic hair on Sandra Day O'Connor's gavel.

[Guest Cerebus]

Wow the whole face of the Supreme Court will change since a conservative judge will be replaced by another conservative judge and we'll have a conservative judge replacing a conservative judge as Chief Justice.

[Guest BDC]

Wow the whole face of the Supreme Court will change since a conservative judge will be replaced by another conservative judge and we'll have a conservative judge replacing a conservative judge as Chief Justice.

and who's on first?

[Guest Cerebus]

Wow the whole face of the Supreme Court will change since a conservative judge will be replaced by another conservative judge and we'll have a conservative judge replacing a conservative judge as Chief Justice.

and who's on first?

Legislative branch?

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Bush will use his experience with owning the Rangers to pick his new chief justice.

 

David Justice.

[NoCalMike 0]

It would kind of be a smart move strategically, because imagine liberals getting caught once again arguing against a minority that Bush is appointing to a prominent position.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Boy will there be mass hysteria if this happens. I hope Bush does it just for laughs.

 

From what I heard, Thomas just sits back and macks during the court cases, doesn't the Chief Justice have to be vocal and stuff?...

[The Czech Republic 0]

Boy will there be mass hysteria if this happens. I hope Bush does it just for laughs.

 

From what I heard, Thomas just sits back and macks during the court cases, doesn't the Chief Justice have to be vocal and stuff?...

Lean back, lean back

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Besides, that Thomas is too right-wing, we need a more moderate judge.

 

Say, what about this Scalia guy?...

[Guest Loss]

Making Thomas Supreme Court justice is only going to further polarize the country if it happens, and Bush has already pledged to win the support of those who voted for Kerry. Whether fair or not, the association most have with Clarence Thomas is to Anita Hill and the sexual harassment case.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I don't think that's all that big a deal. I think a bigger problem is that Clarence is an "Uncle Tom" to the Left and is conservative.

 

I think Bush ought to appoint Ginsburg or Souter as big boss (not...)

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

How old is Sandra D.? She seems reasonable enough.

[Guest MikeSC]

Making Thomas Supreme Court justice is only going to further polarize the country if it happens, and Bush has already pledged to win the support of those who voted for Kerry. Whether fair or not, the association most have with Clarence Thomas is to Anita Hill and the sexual harassment case.

Unfortunately, Hill's case is exceptionally flimsy.

 

Besides, it makes Thomas more Clintonian, doesn't it?

-=Mike

[Guest Loss]

All that I'm saying is that if Bush truly wants to become a uniter, he needs to start at least trying to avoid decisions that are guaranteed to piss people off. Clarence Thomas doesn't exactly have a sterling reputation, especially among women.

[teke184 0]

How old is Sandra D.?  She seems reasonable enough.

74 and she's already had cancer.

 

 

Considering the age of the current court, the new Chief Justice will be Thomas or someone new to the court. David Souter has an outside shot, but he's a dark-horse choice.

 

1. John Paul Stevens, the most liberal justice, is 84 and on the way out

 

2. Antonin Scalia is further to the right of Thomas and is over 70. If Thomas won't get appointed, Scalia has no hope of getting appointed.

 

3. Kennedy is over 70 and wouldn't be chosen because a bunch of people are pissed at him for not overturning Rowe Vs. Wade in 1992. (He was the swing vote that kept Rowe from being overturned.)

 

4. Sandra Day O'Connor is over 70 and has survived cancer once already.

 

5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a Clinton appointee, over 70, and has survived cancer.

 

6. Steven Breyer is a Clinton appointee. He is probably in his 60s or 70s but Bush wouldn't make him the Chief Justice unless he was dealing with a Democrat-controlled Senate.

 

7. David Souter is either in his 60s or 70s and is a centrist. His saving grace is that he's acceptable to both sides, although people on the right would prefer to keep a constructionalist like Rehnquist in the Chief Justice spot.

 

 

Wikipedia has writeups on the court, its history, and the current justices.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

From what I heard, Thomas just sits back and macks during the court cases

 

Based on this, I would support Thomas for Chief Justice. But only on the condition that he refers to Ginsberg and O'Connor as "my biotches."

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

I severely doubt you'll see Mr. Scalia or Mr. Thomas as Chief Justice, just based upon the fact that it is so rare to see someone be promoted from within the Court. I think you'll see someone named as Chief Justice who is a social moderate with conservative leanings, because otherwise, there's little to no chance it'll get through the Senate. Fun.

 

--Ryan

...damn, three posts in one day? I must be motivated or something...

[The Czech Republic 0]

I thought there was a better chance of promoting someone who's been on the bench for some time to Chief Justice rather than importing a new Chief Justice from out of nowhere. I thought Rehnquist was on the Supreme Court before ascending to Chief Justice.

[Slayer 0]

I don't understand why they haven't promoted from within the court more often. To me it would make more sense to promote someone with experience on the court as an AJ to CJ rather than bring in some new guy and promote him right to the top.

 

The only negative I can think of is that you would have to go through two confirmation processes instead of one.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Let's give Robert Bork another chance.

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

The reasoning behind naming a Chief Justice from outside of the Court is that you are able to instill someone with more of your (and by your I mean the President's) political ideologies into the Chief position. More often than not, that person comes from outside of the Court's realm. In this case, Mr. Scalia and Mr. Thomas appear to be too polarizing for them to wind up with said position. As I said, I think you'll see someone from outside of the Court to be named Chief Justice, with Bush probably getting at least one more seat to appoint. It'd be far more likely to receive the Senate confirmation that way, in my mind.

 

--Ryan

...now watch as Mr. Thomas winds up with the job...