Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees

Thursday, June 30, 2005
Now that Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, has cancer, coupled with talk that Justices Sandra Day O’Connor, 75, and John Paul Stevens, 85, might also consider stepping down, there is quite a buzz in the beltway about the Supreme Court. Majority Leader Bill Frist said Tuesday he’s been talking to Democratic leader Harry Reid about nominees for a potential vacancy on the Supreme Court.

Reid later offered what he considered good possibilities: GOP Sens. Mel Martinez of Florida, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Mike Crapo of Idaho and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. They “are people who serve in the Senate now who are Republicans who I think would be outstanding Supreme Court members,” Reid said. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, called on Bush to pick a consensus candidate if a vacancy comes open. “Americans want to be brought together around this decision.” What should the President look for in a nominee for the court and who would you nominate?
This entry was posted by on Thursday, June 30, 2005 at 08:51. and is filed under News and Events. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own blog. All new comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.
Bookmark Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees at del.icio.us Digg Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees Bloglines Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees Technorati Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees Bookmark Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees at Furl.net Bookmark Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees at reddit.com Bookmark Senate Leaders Now Discussing Supreme Court Nominees with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry
  1. O'Connor Steps Down

    Breaking news for the day: Sandra Day O’Connor has announced that she is retiring from the United States Supreme Court. Yesterday, Anthony Bradley asked what the President should look for in a Supreme Court Nominee. Join the discussion here.

    Weblog: Acton Institute PowerBlog
    Tracked: Jul 01, 10:57
  2. Candidates to replace O'Connor

    The already has been much discussion over who should be appointed to replace her. Some argue that the replacement should be a woman. Others (i.e. liberals) insist that the President should appoint someone who is a moderate. And others still (i.e. conservatives) insist that the appointment should not be someone who holds to the "living constitution" view of jurisprudence.

    Weblog: PajamaHadin
    Tracked: Jul 02, 02:46

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

  1. marc says:
    #1 2005-06-30 15:00 (Reply)

    While I haven’t been doing the investigation required to give you a name, I can say that I’m a fan of the “Dead Constitution” theory of jurisprudence.

  2. Anthony Bradley says:
    #2 2005-06-30 15:18 (Reply)

    marc, thanks for blogging with us and offering the “Dead Constitution” link! This could be critical in discussing the way to interpret the Constitution as we evaluate nominees in the future. Very useful!!

  3. Danny says:
    #3 2005-07-04 00:09 (Reply)

    Let’s assume that the Democrats are going for broke, in other words, that they’re playing to their leftist base and will strongly oppose any nominee to the right of David Souter. This would mean picking a supposed moderate, like Alberto Gonzales, would win Bush not many Democrats but would lose him many on the right. What should the president look for in a nominee?

    1) Unlike Robert Bork, someone with a friendly face and personality. This may seem superficial, but in a media saturated age it is unfortunately necessary.

    2) A nominee without unnecessary baggage, like Janice Rogers Brown’s comments about the elderly cannibalizing the young. Fighting against attacks on a nominee’s conservative judicial record will be plenty hard enough with out added distractions.

    3) Out of the remaining nominees, he should go ahead and pick the one who is youngest and most reliably conservative.

    By reliably conservative, I mean someone who’s had political or judicial experience, preferably in Washington, D.C. itself, and won’t be seduced by the beltway establishment’s advice to ‘mature’ in office, by which the establishment really means ‘move left.’ I would recommend John Roberts, but I don’t have enough information on the various choices.

  4. Anthony Bradley says:
    #4 2005-07-05 10:48 (Reply)

    Danny, these are most excellent things to consider!! Thanks for offering this! It’d be good to send this to White House!


Add Comment


Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.