Posted on 09/02/2009 9:43:18 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
The legal world — or at least those who watch movements at the Supreme Court closely — is a bit abuzz this morning with the news that Justice John Paul Stevens has confirmed that he has hired only one clerk so far for next year’s term.
Clerk-watching has long been one of the signals as to whether a justice plans to retire, although clearly not foolproof and definitely not official. Justices usually hire three to four clerks by the beginning of the summer, a year or so before the next term when the clerks would start work. For Justice Stevens, the one hire — for the Supreme Court season beginning in October 2010 — is fueling suggestions that plans to retire may be in the offing.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
If 0bambi gets his way, they won’t be relevant anyway.
Elections have consequences.
And we’ll be living with these consequences for DECADES.
I hope not. Not just because I want him to live for another three years. But, also because he is the one lib Justice most likely to rule against some of the more outrageous and fascistic components of Obama nation.
These liberal activists held out as long as they could while Bush was in office. Now you can expect them to step down while Obama is in control. Since there’s at least some possibility that the Dems may lose some Senate seats in the next election, I would expect this to happen well before then.
This is one reason why I was really mad at the Republicans for voting for that Wise Latina. Not only did it put another lousy activist on the court, but it will make it harder to defeat the next nomination. There is a certain momentum in these things, as we saw with Bush’s two appointments. Win one, and you’ll probably win another. And the Republicans will get zero credit for being “nice.”
He is, by far, the most "centrist" of all the court libs. I think that Souter was far more liberal than Stevens. Which of course, once again begs the question, what was GHWB thinking?
I don't have any illusions about Sotomeyer. She, I believe, is well to the left of both Ginsberg and Breyer - well to the left.
Here’s how the new justice will be selected:
It won’t be a Latino/a, because we just got our quota in that category.
It won’t be a white anglo male (since those are genetically flawed and inherit anti-social traits)
It won’t be an Asian (Korean, Vietnamese, Nisei, etc.) because they have no constituency.
It won’t be a Native American because there aren’t any highly qualified candidates.
So we’re left with having a young, black female.
(It would be nice to think that the above is parody; unfortunately, it’s not. Those are the most important criteria by which justices are selected today.)
Even King Solomon wouldn’t be accepted (as a white male, and a Jew).
And that, as everyone said, is ridiculous...
Justice Stevens has frequently fluctuated in the number of clerks he hires. He’s had as few as two in the past. He is almost 90 years old, but he is in very good health and of sound mind. But, I do not know his plans. These people are very discreet.
Is there an out and out communist on the court? Time to fill that seat.
Figuring that the Dems will lose the Senate in the next cycle, he’ll want to retire before then.
Justice Stevens is not a communist. Nor is Breyer. Ginzburg is inexplicable.
The comment was directed at the type of justice OB may select, based upon the people around him; not on particular sitting judges.
Sorry. But, I agree with you. He will appoint a hard-left ideologue. A black lesbian or trannie with good Bolshevik credentials?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.