Multiple Supremes?
This article by an Associated Press writer offers all the recent tidbits circulating about the Supreme Court. It says Bush is meeting Democrats, that's a good sign. On NPR, they also pointed out that he doesn't have to worry about pleasing his Republican base, since he cannot run again. That means he can pretty much appoint whomever he pleases. That could go either way, but I have a feeling that will be a good thing. My gut tells me Bush wants to appoint the right person for the job. I think he's going to make this pick on his own, without relying too heavily on his usual advisors. That would be a very good thing, for he tends to surround himself with poor advisors. He's not going to pick someone left wing, but I think a moderate conservative with a proven track record has a good chance. I'm just feeling positive today. I'm feeling good about the President and his ability to make this decision.
The other big question is whether Rehnquist will retire. My feeling is that he won't. If he was going to do it, he would have done it already. I don't think he will, I think he wants to work as long as possible. I've heard it mentioned that he idolizes John Marshall and that he wants to serve as long as he did. I don't think he's going to make it to 35 years as Chief Justice (he'd have to serve until 2021 and still be heathy at 97). But in January 2007, he will have been on the court for 35 years. He might be making that his goal. Another likely motivation is the desire to keep working despite the Cancer. Arlen Spectre explained that motivation pretty well: "Having being engaged in a bout with cancer myself, I know that it's good to get up every morning and have something that you have to do, something that is important to do"
Specter and others have suggested O'Conner could replace Rehnquist if he does retire. That would be interesting. She's basically been chief justice for a while anyway because of her swing vote status. She apparently would be willing to take the job if offered. Personally, I don't think Bush would do that. I think he would see her as a judge legislating from the bench, the one thing he has consistently stood against when asked about the Supreme Court. Not to mention that that would threaten his ability to create a lasting change on the court.
The other big question is whether Rehnquist will retire. My feeling is that he won't. If he was going to do it, he would have done it already. I don't think he will, I think he wants to work as long as possible. I've heard it mentioned that he idolizes John Marshall and that he wants to serve as long as he did. I don't think he's going to make it to 35 years as Chief Justice (he'd have to serve until 2021 and still be heathy at 97). But in January 2007, he will have been on the court for 35 years. He might be making that his goal. Another likely motivation is the desire to keep working despite the Cancer. Arlen Spectre explained that motivation pretty well: "Having being engaged in a bout with cancer myself, I know that it's good to get up every morning and have something that you have to do, something that is important to do"
Specter and others have suggested O'Conner could replace Rehnquist if he does retire. That would be interesting. She's basically been chief justice for a while anyway because of her swing vote status. She apparently would be willing to take the job if offered. Personally, I don't think Bush would do that. I think he would see her as a judge legislating from the bench, the one thing he has consistently stood against when asked about the Supreme Court. Not to mention that that would threaten his ability to create a lasting change on the court.
posted by Chris L from MI at 9:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home