Friday, May 1, 2009

Obama's First Supreme Court Choice - How Far Left Will He Go?

Supreme Court Justice David Souter announced he will be resigning his seat on the court after it ends its current session, this coming summer. Souter, appointed by President Bush (41), had been generally considered one of the liberal members of the court, siding with the leftists on the vast majority of decisions. Given this, it is unlikely that Obama's new appointee will have any impact on the power balance on the court.

Souter promoted himself as a conservative during his vetting process, one who would uphold strict interpretation of the Constitution. Shortly after he was seated, it became apparent he had misled the President - he was a moderate left winger in sheep's clothing.

Early speculation in the news is that Obama will nominate US Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor. A female, of Puerto Rican heritage would fill two of Obama's stated criteria for the position - female, and a minority. However, it is far too early for a favorite to emerge.

This will be a very revealing pick for Obama. Will he choose a moderate liberal in the mold of Souter, or will he pick a far left nutjob - a clone of Ruth Bader Ginsburg? I would place money on the latter, especially since there is nothing Republicans can do to oppose the pick - he will jump at the chance to give a lifetime appointment to a radical judicial activist.

Obama is not constrained by many rules concerning his pick - a Supreme Court Justice does not have to meet any qualifications - doesn't have to have been a lawyer, or a judge, or have any judicial training or experience whatsoever. It could be Hillary Clinton ... Eric Holder ... Janet Napolitano ... all three have been mentioned as possibilities. He could nominate Bill Ayers, for pete's sake ....


Update - The more I hear in the media about this as the days go by, the worse it gets. There is no pretense of argument from the left about who the pick should be. The most important factor to them is which minority (or minorities) are represented by the pick. The only experience that Obama thinks is credible is how downtrodden the person and his monority affiliations are. He's flat come out and said that several times, that he wants someone who has been failed by the system, who has experienced being shafted by the government and big business. Judicial and Constitutional experience/knowledge are not necessary, and may not even be wanted. It is a given that such a minority person will be far left - any minority who is considered moderate or conservative is not a 'real' minority.

The argument from the right is still partisan, but much more logical. They want a conservative jurist, or at least a moderate one, who is judicially qualified, and will apply the law and the Constitution as it is written.

Our framers, the incredible people who established the foundation for this country, established the Supreme Court as a check on the power of the President and Congress - to make sure that what those two branches did was in agreement with the Constitution. The Supreme Court cannot make laws - it cannot make policy - that is an absolute mandate of our Constitution. However, Obama has made it very clear that he sees it differently - to him, the court is a tool to be used to make social changes . Apparently, Obama believes He knows better than the people who founded this country. No surprise there .....

2 comments:

Kath said...

Napolitan Declines to Rule Out Supreme Court Interest --- that is one scary, scary headline there. She thinks she is QUALIFIED??? Oh, wait, I forgot again, no qualifications necessary for any job in this administration!

Kath said...

Sorry, Napolitano. Maybe she is just easily misunderstood, but in my heart I don't think so.

Why not Bill Clinton? Might as well.

This could get really crazy!