Another political shocker from D.C.: Justice Souter calls it a career

[thatcrazycajun]

Coming just three days after the stunning announcement by Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) that he is returning to the Democrat fold after decades of being a voice of moderation in the Republican Party, another major departure just got announced. US Supreme Court Justice David Souter, picked 19 years ago by George Bush the Elder to succeed the late William Brennan, has officially informed the White House that he plans to retire from the court once the current term is over and a replacement has been chosen and confirmed.

Today President Barack Obama (D), handed his first chance to leave a decades-long mark on the law of the land far sooner than anyone anticipated, announced in a surprise appearance to the press (see The New York Times' story here) that he would seek an independent-minded person to fill Souter's seat, not necessarily a liberal such as Souter turned out to be...to the eternal dismay and rage of conservatives, who jeered Souter back in the day as an "empty suit" with no clear record indicating he would rule as they wished on key issues before the high court.

With only one African-American (Clarence Thomas) and one woman (Ruth Bader Ginsburg) currently on the court amid a sea of white male faces, and being himself African-American as well, Obama is under enormous pressure to pick a member of one or both of these two groups on his first nomination at-bat. While I admit I would dearly love to see a Supreme Court bench that, to use former President Bill Clinton's famous formulation, "looks more like America," I do not want ethnic/racial origin or gender to supersede legitimate qualifications for the job. To my mind, those are, in order: (1) broad and deep judicial experience at the federal level, either ruling from behind the gavel or arguing in front of it†; (2) abiding and faithful respect for the Constitution and all of its still-in-force amendments; and (3) the ability to strike a balance between honoring that original text and its authors' intent and the changing needs of the times...and of a nation and government grown far larger and more powerful than the Founders could even in their wildest dreams have foreseen.

Nor do I think the new justice should be ideologically canalized beforehand, as much as it would horrify me to see another Thomas, Alito or Scalia join the court. Supreme Court justices are supposed to be utterly impartial, basing their rulings solely on the Constitution, established law and precedent and the dictates of their own consciences, without regard to party or ideology...and the last Court's historic and heinous failure to do so in December of 2000 legitimized a stolen Presidency and its resultant eight years of evil and misrule. Mr. Justice Souter's successor will need all the freedom he or she can get to rule without being boxed in by either liberal or conservative expectations...even when that ruling is one I hate.

Choose very, very carefully, Mr. President; you will be writing our future with your choice.

†Some of your replies already suggest as candidates academics rather than actual jurists; while some law-school types under consideration may have served as judges/justices at one time, I'm holding out for someone with recent real-world court experience, under the rationale of "those who can, do; those who can't, teach." If they could really do such a good job running a court, why aren't they out ruling on the law instead of just teaching it to young mush-skulls (as the late Prof. Kingsfield would have put it)?

Comments

Supreme Court

[markiv1111.livejournal.com]

One way or another, it is going to be interesting. Obama obviously knows that people will be watching him very closely, and he also knows that a lot of people voted for him in the belief that he would be a moderate. I'm not going to suggest a preference of any sort -- name, male vs. female, dark skinned versus light, ideological moderate, ideological liberal like me -- and if I did, Obama would only care about my opinion if it became obvious that there were a few million other people who agreed with it. But this country has a long history of watchful waiting, when it is the time for a president to pick a justice, and I am okay with doing it again. (I'm wondering: Could Obama delay a serious attempt at getting a nominee confirmed until the Franken vs. Coleman flap has gone as far as it can possibly go? Just wondering.) There are certainly a lot of potential candidates available.

Nate

[darrenzieger.livejournal.com]

The big question in my mind is, how exactly will this time out; the Repugs will filibuster anyone Obama selects. But with Arlen Specter having switched parties, the Dems could have a filibuster-proof majority if Al Franken ever gets seated.

Needless to say, this development will - no, surely already has - driven the Repigs (further) over the edge in their psychotic determination to delay Franken's seating as long as possible; if they can't filibuster, they'll have lost the only method by which they can effect the legislative process. They will be the governmental equivalent of Milton in Office Space, working in a closet, impotently asking for his red stapler back.

And yes, they will, sooner than later, crack up and burn the place to the ground - maybe even literally.

Given the psychological makeup of the average Republican senator, I think that full psychotic breaks are inevitable once Franken is seated and they can't swing their dicks around anymore.

Seriously, that's when I'm going start watching C-Span religiously, because it will only be a matter of time before someone pulls a gun, or starts burning stuff, or bolts the doors and forces everyone to participate in an impromptu performance of "Lord of the Flies," starring Al Franken as Piggy.

[stevemb.livejournal.com]

One of the things that's going to tick them off is that Specter is still taking up a Republican-assigned seat in each of his committees (including Judiciary). This will continue until the Senate does a new organizing resolution -- if the Democrats have any spine (always a question), they'll take the position that that can darn well wait until Senator Franken arrives so both changes can be taken care of on one swell foop.

[dan-ad-nauseam.livejournal.com]

As noted on NPR last year, Obama himself would have been Courtworthy. Based on that, I think he's going to look at the appointment very carefully.

My prediction is Sonia Sotomayor.

Of course, I was wrong about Biden.

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

Souter never wanted to be on the Court in the first place; he seems to have decided he can finally retire without doing the country major damage.

I'll be interested to see whether Obama picks one of his colleagues from the U of C Law School; there are a few there whom I'd quite like to see on the Court.

[dan-ad-nauseam.livejournal.com]

I think he'll save them for later. Right now, with a no-shift seat and a big majority, he'll probably go for someone likely to be a little more difficult to get confirmed later, and I think he's going to wait on Kagan until after she gets some time as Solicitor General under her belt.