Rehnquist Dead at 80

[Guest Brian]

Breaking over the tellie. I'll get an article up later.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

[Boon 0]

That sucks, dude.

[Guest Brian]

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist Dead

Saturday, September 03, 2005

 

WASHINGTON — Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist (search) died Saturday evening at his home in suburban Virginia, said Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg.

 

A statement from the spokeswoman said he was surrounded by his three children when he died in Arlington.

 

"The Chief Justice battled thyroid cancer since being diagnosed last October and continued to perform his dues on the court until a precipitous decline in his health the last couple of days," she said.

 

Rehnquist was appointed to the Supreme Court (search) as an associate justice in 1971 by President Nixon and took his seat on Jan. 7, 1982. He was elevated to chief justice by President Reagan (search) in 1986.

 

His death ends a remarkable 33-year Supreme Court career during which Rehnquist oversaw the court's conservative shift, presided over an impeachment trial and helped decide a presidential election.

 

The death President Bush his second court opening within pour months and sets up what's expected to be an even more bruising Senate confirmation battle than that of John Roberts.

 

Rehnquist, 80 and ill with cancer, presided over President Clinton's impeachment trial in 1999, helped settle the 2000 presidential election in Bush's favor, and fashioned decisions over the years that diluted the powers of the federal government while strengthening those of the states

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168420,00.html

[therealworldschampion 0]

RIP, I was just switching over to ABC to check on the Notre Dame score and I saw that he passed on.

[SuperJerk 0]

Regardless of how you feel politically, he had a brilliant mind and lived to serve both his country and the law.

[RepoMan 0]

I didn't care for his philosiphy, but RIP and thanks for years of service to the country.

 

Let speculation for his replacment begin now.

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

What Repo said

[Danville_Wrestling 0]

Alberto Gonzalez is my guess at who it will be. In other words, Roberts gets to replace Rehnquist as a big conservative on the court, Gonzalez gets to fill O'Connor's moderate role.

 

I'd pick Orrin Hatch (easy confirmation there), but I don't think he wants to leave the Senate.

 

The biggest question is what happens with the Chief Justice position. Does Scalia get it, does Thomas get it (first black to hold the job?), does Bush nominate a conservative female candidate for chief justice (first female chief justice?), or does he just pick another random dude for the court and peg him for chief justice @ the same time?

 

This REALLY puts the Democrats in a quandry, much like when Rehnquist got the chief justice slot while Scalia was still up for nomination. Liberal groups attacked Rehnquist on possible KKK ties and spent all of their time with him allowing Scalia to get in unanimously. Thus, if the Dems put all their energy into Roberts this coming week then they won't have much of a hand to play if Bush nominates a real "big time" conservative (ala Janice Rogers Brown, another Robert Bork, etc.)

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I'd pick Orrin Hatch (easy confirmation there), but I don't think he wants to leave the Senate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Headline: Orrin Hatch approved for Supremes.

 

Sub-Headline: File Sharing services deemed unconstitutional

 

Sub-Sub Headline: Federal Government computer virus to destroy file sharer's computers deemed constitutional, "does not intrude on private ownership rights."

[Guest Vitamin X]

YES!!

 

VICTORY!

[Vampiro69 0]

Well, I now have a guess as to what the nes networks will be covering for the next 3 months after they tire of covering the Hurricane.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Yeah, fuck a bunch of Hatch, I like to "borrow" music in addition to buying it.

[SuperJerk 0]

Since the President will probably elevate one of the other Justices to Chief Justice, my money's on Scalia (although given the current political climate Stevens or Kennedy would be easier to confirm).

 

 

edit: Replace Stevens with Souter. My bad.

Edited September 5, 2005 by Y2Jerk

[snuffbox 0]

If Bush attempts to push through anyone to the right of moderate it will be among the bigger political blunders since Gerald Ford's election campaign. Not necessarily bad for W. himself, but it could really help the Democrats pull a Newt&Friends circa 1994.

 

Bush and the current Republican power-bloc will be taking the heat for the hurricane and the gas prices (not to mention this new docrine of 'four more years of war')...to push the divide would be a gift to the left.

[teke184 0]

Since the President will probably elevate one of the other Justices to Chief Justice, my money's on Scalia  (although given the current political climate Stevens or Kennedy would be easier to confirm).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Stevens or Kennedy?

 

Riiight.

 

 

They'd be easier to confirm in theory due to Democrat crossover, but Stevens is pretty close to death's door and Kennedy has absolutely NO confidence in him from the Republican party who DO have a majority of the votes.

 

 

If someone gets promoted from within, it'll be Scalia, Thomas, or nobody.

[The Czech Republic 0]

When was the last time someone went directly to Chief Justice? I think it should be Scalia, by the way.

[teke184 0]

When was the last time someone went directly to Chief Justice? I think it should be Scalia, by the way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Either Warren Burger or Earl Warren.

 

Not sure about Burger, but Warren was a HUGELY controversial figure throughout his tenure and beyond.

[Styles 0]

When was the last time someone went directly to Chief Justice? I think it should be Scalia, by the way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I believe it was Warren Earl Burger (Chief Justice before Rehnquist), in 1969 by President Nixon. Appointing someone directy to Chief Justice has actually been the norm throughout history, as if Wikipedia is to be believed, only 3 Justices (including Rehnquist) were promoted from Associate Justice.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Yeah, I think you should ascend to Chief Justice, not just go right into it. This will probably be the more controversial nominee, unless John Roberts is really the hill the Democrats want to die on.

[SuperJerk 0]

Since the President will probably elevate one of the other Justices to Chief Justice, my money's on Scalia  (although given the current political climate Stevens or Kennedy would be easier to confirm).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Stevens or Kennedy?

 

Riiight.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What part of "my money's on Scalia" did you not fucking understand?

[teke184 0]

When was the last time someone went directly to Chief Justice? I think it should be Scalia, by the way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I believe it was Warren Earl Burger (Chief Justice before Rehnquist), in 1969 by President Nixon. Appointing someone directy to Chief Justice has actually been the norm throughout history, as if Wikipedia is to be believed, only 3 Justices (including Rehnquist) were promoted from Associate Justice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

While it's true in that sense, at least one of those promtions from outside went to Charles Evans Hughes, who had resigned his spot as an Associate Justice circa 1915 to run for President in 1916.

 

Also, another of those Chief Justices was former President Taft, who had been a distinguished judge before being co-opted by his wife and Teddy Roosevelt into running for President in 1908.

 

Taft had been offered a seat on the Supreme Court several times but had been forced by his wife to refuse it because she'd always wanted to be First Lady.

[teke184 0]

Since the President will probably elevate one of the other Justices to Chief Justice, my money's on Scalia  (although given the current political climate Stevens or Kennedy would be easier to confirm).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Stevens or Kennedy?

 

Riiight.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What part of "my money's on Scalia" did you not fucking understand?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Ahem... FUCK YOU.

 

My belief is that Stevens and Kennedy have ZERO chance of even getting nominated, let alone accepted.

 

Even bringing them up is a waste of time because Stevens alone is supposed to be on death's door and looking to get off the court.

[SuperJerk 0]

Since the President will probably elevate one of the other Justices to Chief Justice, my money's on Scalia  (although given the current political climate Stevens or Kennedy would be easier to confirm).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Stevens or Kennedy?

 

Riiight.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What part of "my money's on Scalia" did you not fucking understand?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ahem... FUCK YOU.

 

My belief is that Stevens and Kennedy have ZERO chance of even getting nominated, let alone accepted.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well then your belief is wrong. In no way do two long-serving Associate Justices have "zero chance" of being confirmed by the Senate. I'll admit the chances of them being nominated are unlikely, but their confirmation would be easier than Scalia or Thomas, who are lightning-rods of controversy. Especially considering both Stevens and Kennedy were appointed by Republican presidents.

 

First you contradict me for something I didn't say, now you're showing your apparently VAST ignorance by completely overlooking the qualifications of two Justices who are respected moderates. That's pretty pathetic reasoning.

[teke184 0]

"Respected moderates"?

 

Stevens is the HEAD of the Liberal bloc of the court.

 

Kennedy, while a moderate, is not "respected" except by the Liberals. His esteem has been steadily going downhill since being appointed to the court, with some of his recent votes, including Kelo, being VERY questionable.

 

 

Unless the Dems gain about 6-10 votes between now and the vote on the Chief Justice, neither would win because the 55 Republican Senators are enough to block either from getting voted in without special intervention by Bush.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

When was the last time someone went directly to Chief Justice? I think it should be Scalia, by the way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Rehnquist did, didn't he?

 

*edit* Guess not. Don't know why I always thought this.

[SuperJerk 0]

Unless the Dems gain about 6-10 votes between now and the vote on the Chief Justice, neither would win because the 55 Republican Senators are enough to block either from getting voted in without special intervention by Bush.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stop to consider how many Republican Senators there are who are far more liberal than the Bush Administration. The Senate Republicans are NOT a solid unit of conservatives ideologues, and many would have no problem voting to confirm someone who isn't as conservative as Scalia or even Thomas.

 

Kennedy, while a moderate, is not "respected" except by the Liberals. His esteem has been steadily going downhill since being appointed to the court, with some of his recent votes, including Kelo, being VERY questionable.

 

Yes, many conservatives hate him, but conservatives do not make up a majority of the Senate.

[Ravenbomb 0]

Pat Robertson strikes again!

[SuperJerk 0]

It looks like he's praying for constipation relief.

[The Czech Republic 0]

It looks like he's praying for constipation relief.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll admit it, I laughed.