What Ed Said

This New York Times cites several people who have known Barack Obama throughout his career who predict that his choice to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court will likely be "moderate" and "pragmatic" one.

This bit is particularly telling:

Now Mr. Obama is preparing to select his first Supreme Court nominee to replace retiring Justice David H. Souter. In interviews, former colleagues and students say they have a fairly strong sense of the kind of justice he will favor: not a larger-than-life liberal to counter the conservative pyrotechnics of Justice Antonin Scalia, but a careful pragmatist with a limited view of the role of courts.

"His nominee will not create the proverbial shock and awe," said Charles J. Ogletree, a Harvard professor who has known the president since his days as a student.

Mr. Obama believes the court must never get too far ahead of or behind public sentiment, they say. He may have a mandate for change, and Senate confirmation odds in his favor. But he has almost always disappointed those who expected someone in his position -- he was Harvard's first black law review president and one of the few minority members of the University of Chicago's law faculty -- to side consistently with liberals.

I have to say I find it hard to believe that Obama's pick won't be reliably in the liberal camp, I have to say I agree with Ed Schultz who said it very well the other day:

"I think it's time to say it. This is no time for bi-partisanship, we need a liberal on the Supreme Court." [...]

"Will President Obama put a liberal lion on the Supreme Court, and I mean no shame, no apologies. Or will he cave in when the Party of No starts crying about a consensus choice? May I remind Americans tonight, we had a consensus back in November, it was called an election. They lost. Elections have consequences. This is our time to shape the future of this country."

Watch it (h/t Crooks & Liars):

Tags: David Souter, Ed Schultz, President Obama, Supreme Court (all tags)

Comments

14 Comments

Re: What Ed Said

I think he will appoint a liberal.. I just don't think its going to be an outspoken liberal advocate like Scalia is on the right.  Instead, I think we will see a quieter liberal, much like Souter himself.  

Either way, the justice will absolutely be pro-choice.  

by 30000Fine 2009-05-04 05:22AM | 0 recs
I hate it when 'bipartisanship' is somehow dirty

People equate "bipartisanship" with "date rape" these days, and that's really too bad.  I don't blame them, because that's what the Republicans have essentially made it into over the last sixteen years or so.

However, that's not what it's supposed to mean, and I think Obama is right not to put an "activist" (oh how I hate that word when talking about judges) on the Supreme Court bench.

Listen, folks: if Democrats actually deserve the great honor the public has bestowed upon them by granting them control of the nation's engines of power, then they should be better than the people the power was taken from.  Putting a Leftist Scalia on the bench is just going to justify the next Republican president to go just as far to the right.  If Obama chooses a non-extremist of unquestioned character (as is traditional per my understanding), then there's nothing legitimate for Republicans to point to as justification when their next president tries to nominate Justice Rove.

by Dracomicron 2009-05-04 05:32AM | 0 recs
Health Care

Please some one tell me why we are not asking all the GOP to stop taking the Government Health care they get for being in Senator, Congressman, or GS worker or Med-care or Military, or Kidd Care or any other government ran health care. I feel this is the way for every one to see the commercials they are running are wrong, when it tell you the government will not let you chose your Dr. and when you can go to the Hospital on and on. They use it every day and if its so bad why don't they stop using it?    

by CSMglg 2009-05-04 05:46AM | 0 recs
Pointing out hyporcricy is fine

It's an election year gambit, though.  We're better off pointing out how much good government health care reform can do us than complaining about the other guys being two-faced jerkwads.

by Dracomicron 2009-05-04 06:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Pointing out hyporcricy is fine

No. The right has nearly destroyed the state. This is no time for half measures.

"I have to say I find it hard to believe that Obama's pick won't be reliably in the liberal camp..."

Then apparently Beeton has not been paying attention to Obama's actions. The next time he appoints a fierce lefty to a senior position will be... what, the second time?

by MNPundit 2009-05-04 06:55AM | 0 recs
C'mon now

Who says that "a non-extremist of unquestioned character" is a half-measure?

by Dracomicron 2009-05-04 07:51AM | 0 recs
I read pieces

like this, and I wonder if the writer understands how the EIC gets picked on Law Reviews.  

EIC's are elected, and the winner is almost always the person who is a consensus builder, not a firebrand.  That is Obama's heritage, and in many ways the story of his life.  

It won't be a young Larry Tribe.  It will be someone who will vote with the liberal majorities on things that matter, and will have impeccable academic credentials.  

Think a left of center John Roberts.

by fladem 2009-05-04 05:53AM | 0 recs
Who?

I've had several friends say "He needs a strong liberal," but every time I ask who they suggest I get blank stares.

Who would make a good liberal lion on the Supreme Court?  Answer that and you get more credibility.

by Vox Populi 2009-05-04 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: What Ed Said

I wish they would cancel Ed.   What a buffoon.

His show sucks and he is a jackass.   He should have stayed a rightwing talker.   They can have him back if if you ask me.

by RichardFlatts 2009-05-04 06:10AM | 0 recs
Why does the left always live in future disaster?

In fact, we go out of our way to predict it.

"OMG, I just KNOW Obama is not going to put a liberal on the court...."

So, if he picks one of these choices, what will the consensus be:

Some of the names that have been circulating outside the White House include recently confirmed Solicitor General Elena Kagan, U.S. Appeals Court Judges Sonia Sotomayor, Kim McLane Wardlaw, Sandra Lea Lynch and Diane Pamela Wood, and Leah Ward Sears, chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court.

Not liberal enough?  

Funny, I can hear the left scream not liberal enough, while I am sure THIS is what is coming from the right:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090503/ap_o n_go_su_co/us_scotus_hatch;_ylt=Au7RtpN4 wO2fuzobP7rK0WlMEP0E

So, even if THE LEFT doesn't consider Obama's pick liberal enough, count on the right to make them the second coming of Louie Brandeis!

by WashStateBlue 2009-05-04 07:56AM | 0 recs
I'm predicting

outrage over whoever he nominates...those who want to find fault, will find fault.

by DTOzone 2009-05-04 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: What Ed Said

Funny. While the NY Times is reading tea leaves and suggests that Obama will probably pick a non-liberal, the WSJ, consulting Laurence Tribe,  reads tea leaves and suggests that Obama will definitely pick a progressive.  

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12413950 8689381755.html

Progressive Vision Likely in Next Jurist

President Barack Obama is likely to seek a nominee for the Supreme Court who will not only defend the liberal jurisprudence that reshaped American society in the mid-20th century, but who may also aim to build a progressive legal vision for the century ahead.

Mr. Obama's ideal candidate, speculates Harvard University professor Laurence Tribe, would "bring majorities together [on the court] around a compelling vision of the law with the elfin touch of someone like [William] Brennan, someone who can move the ocean liner without making terrible waves." Mr. Tribe taught constitutional law to Mr. Obama and today is among the president's legal confidants.

I guess the blasted muddy definition about WHAT makes a "liberal" or "progressive" just that is the main issue here.   Is a decided pro-choice stance enough to qualify a potential candidate as being "progressive" compared to "moderate/pragmatic"?    

by devilrays 2009-05-04 08:47AM | 0 recs
Re: What Ed Said

Considering pro-choice with an emphasis on contraception IS the moderate position, no?

by MNPundit 2009-05-04 11:48AM | 0 recs
To the Republican base

and to the party, Arlen Specter has a "left wing voting record", as they just stated.

70% of the country is far left to this crowd.

Anyone to the left of Scalia is a screaming lefty to the base.

by WashStateBlue 2009-05-04 12:15PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads