Souter retiring in June

[denali]

Souter Plans to Retire From Supreme Court, A.P. Reports

Justice David H. Souter has told the White House that he plans to retire from the Supreme Court in June, The Associated Press reported. The retirement of Justice Souter, who was nominated by President George H. W. Bush in 1990, would give President Obama his first opportunity to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court.

[kingster]

Denali you gave me false hopes.I saw those headlines and thought it was Mark Sauder.

[HoosierHelen]

Souter Plans to Retire From Supreme Court, A.P. Reports

Justice David H. Souter has told the White House that he plans to retire from the Supreme Court in June, The Associated Press reported. The retirement of Justice Souter, who was nominated by President George H. W. Bush in 1990, would give President Obama his first opportunity to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court.


Denali,

This will certainly be an interesting development. Any guesses who we can expect to be nominated? I'm going to begin my homework tomorrow on this one.

[denali]

Denali,

This will certainly be an interesting development. Any guesses who we can expect to be nominated? I'm going to begin my homework tomorrow on this one.

OMGosh, I bet Glenn Beck and the likes had heart attacks over this news.

[HomeyG]

OMGosh, I bet Glenn Beck and the likes had heart attacks over this news.

Don't know why. Its not going to change the makeup of the Court. Although Souter was appointed by Bush, he voted liberal.

[HomeyG]

Wonder if any Republican Senator will "Bork" any of Obama's nominees.

[evilkumquat]

Wonder if any Republican Senator will "Bork" any of Obama's nominees.

Well, if you mean "Bork" as in research a political nutjob and do what you can to prevent him from getting the bench, it's doubtful.

However, if you mean run a shameless campaign to block Obama's nominees simply because your party is in the minority and can do nothing constructive, despite the desperate need for this country to get past petty politics (and the fact your party had its way completely unfettered for six of the past eight years and almost completely ran this country into the ground), I'd say the odds are pretty even.

[HomeyG]

Well, if you mean "Bork" as in research a political nutjob and do what you can to prevent him from getting the bench, it's doubtful.

However, if you mean run a shameless campaign to block Obama's nominees simply because your party is in the minority and can do nothing constructive, despite the desperate need for this country to get past petty politics (and the fact your party had its way completely unfettered for six of the past eight years and almost completely ran this country into the ground), I'd say the odds are pretty even.

I mean to defeat a judicial nomination through a concerted attack on the nominee's character, background and philosophy or should they only consider his or her's judicial qualification.

[evilkumquat]

I mean to defeat a judicial nomination through a concerted attack on the nominee's character, background and philosophy or should they only consider his or her's judicial qualification.

And what part of the nominee's character, background and philosophy NOT have any bearing on his judicial qualifications?

If the guy is a right wing nutter, it's pretty obvious he's going to base his pronouncements on these views.

[HomeyG]

And what part of the nominee's character, background and philosophy NOT have any bearing on his judicial qualifications?

If the guy is a right wing nutter, it's pretty obvious he's going to base his pronouncements on these views.

I'm not quite sure I'm reading you correctly. I recognize that the President can, and probably should, consider the nominee's character, background and philosophy but should the Senate only consider the nominee's judicial qualifications or should they also consider his character, background, and philosophy?

[evilkumquat]

I'm not quite sure I'm reading you correctly. I recognize that the President can, and probably should, consider the nominee's character, background and philosophy but should the Senate only consider the nominee's judicial qualifications or should they also consider his character, background, and philosophy?

Usually, the character, background and philosophy has already made their judicial qualifications readily apparent.

Sadly, like Jay "Torture" Bybee, sometimes they get their job before their true insidious evil is discovered.