How Replacing Justice John Paul Stevens Could Get Interesting

[Crabtownboy]

Let the show begin!

In perhaps the most telegraphed move in recent history, Justice John Paul Stevens announced his retirement today. So begins the next great Supreme Court nomination fight, which is sure to bring all the usual bells and whistles: Cable News shout fests over the fate of the constitution, direct mail pieces from pro-life and pro-choice groups begging donations to fight the good fight, and deep dumpster dives into the lost corners of recent legal thought in search of incriminating evidence on one nominee or another. Clearly both parties have an interests in riling up base voters in advance of the November elections, making this round potentially more explosive than the last.

But after you clear away the chaff and turn down the volume, it is unlikely that all this activity will amount to much. Almost any candidate President Obama picks is unlikely to face much challenge in the Senate, where Democrats control 59 seats and many Republicans are on the record opposing filibusters of judicial nominees on ideological grounds. Indeed, Republicans have never before used a filibuster to stop an up or down vote of a judicial nominee.



Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/201...-stevens-could-get-interesting/#ixzz0kcyUAGcA

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

On a side note we could very possibly have, for the first time in US history, not a single 'protestant' on the Supreme Court. Most of the leading contenders are Catholic or Jewish again.

 

[preachinjesus]

Yeah, NPR had a story about that (no Protestants on the Court.) Most ironically most people don't care. More evidence of our growing post-Christian culture.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Yeah, NPR had a story about that (no Protestants on the Court.) Most ironically most people don't care. More evidence of our growing post-Christian culture.

To be honest it is not an issue for me. I only mentioned it because it could come in to play in making a choice. All I care about is having a justice who believes in strict constructionism.

 

[Tom Bryant]

To be honest it is not an issue for me. I only mentioned it because it could come in to play in making a choice. All I care about is having a justice who believes in strict constructionism.

Good luck with that.:BangHead:

 

[matt wade]

The guy has likely been waiting 6 or 7 years to retire, but didn't want to retire while a Republican held the Presidency.

My money is on Obama finding some type of "minority" to fill the position, with their actual qualifications being secondary.

 

[Salty]

The guy has likely been waiting 6 or 7 years to retire, but didn't want to retire while a Republican held the Presidency.

My money is on Obama finding some type of "minority" to fill the position, with their actual qualifications being secondary.

Do we currently have an Oriental or Am Indian on the bench?

 

[rbell]

I think that Obama plans to nominate a left-handed, handicapped lesbian with an Eskimo background.

That'll cover several professionally offended groups at once...

 

[StefanM]

Do we currently have an Oriental or Am Indian on the bench?

Why do you say "Oriental?"

 

[StefanM]

I think that Obama plans to nominate a left-handed, handicapped lesbian with an Eskimo background.

That'll cover several professionally offended groups at once...

Who is also a Buddhist.

 

[preachinjesus]

The guy has likely been waiting 6 or 7 years to retire, but didn't want to retire while a Republican held the Presidency.

Seem to remember several more conservative justices doing the same thing during Clinton's presidency...

My money is on Obama finding some type of "minority" to fill the position, with their actual qualifications being secondary.

{Ironic hat on}Yeah, cuz being more diverse is such a horrible thing...{hat off}

 

[Salty]

Why do you say "Oriental?"

Because, that is one group of people who have no represenation on the SCUS

 

[StefanM]

Because, that is one group of people who have no represenation on the SCUS

I just wondered why you didn't say Asian.

 

[matt wade]

Seem to remember several more conservative justices doing the same thing during Clinton's presidency...

Yes, and I have no problem with that either. I don't have a problem with the timing of the judge's retirement...I was just commenting on it.

{Ironic hat on}Yeah, cuz being more diverse is such a horrible thing...{hat off}

It's a horrible thing when ethnicity comes before qualifications. Of course, you being a liberal, I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

 

[Salty]

I just wondered why you didn't say Asian.

Why do you ask?

 

[StefanM]

Why do you ask?

Just wondering because at least in my experience, the term "oriental" is considered offensive.

 

[matt wade]

Just wondering because at least in my experience, the term "oriental" is considered offensive.

Oh good grief. What a bunch of nonsense.

 

[Salty]

Just wondering because at least in my experience, the term "oriental" is considered offensive.

Okay, I'll bite, why is it offensive?


Oh- Good Grief
-Charile Brown

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

[Re: preachinjesus]

It's a horrible thing when ethnicity comes before qualifications. Of course, you being a liberal, I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

preachinjesus a liberal? Only in the regard that he is liberal thinking enough to consider all the sides of an issue and not march to every drum beat of the Tea Party right.

Ethnicity, religious background, and even political leaning should, in an ideal world, all be non-issues. All that should matter is if he/she believes that the Constitution says what it does.

The sad truth is that all the other things will come into play.

Why is having nine stodgy old white protestant men such a great thing?

 

[Robert Snow]

Just wondering because at least in my experience, the term "oriental" is considered offensive.

Maybe so, but I've never heard it referred to as offensive before. I work with several Vietnamese men and they are very easy to get along with. It might be well to appoint someone like this to the Supreme Court. Diversity is what this country is made up of and to add more to the Supreme Court might be a good thing.