ConfirmThem

Other than Judge Pratter, as referred to in the last post, is anyone expecting any nominations soon? There tends to at least be a mini-flurry of White House nominations after Senate breaks.

I think we're already pretty late in the game, but a judicial nomination now would seem to at least theoretically allow action early next year by getting the ABA process started.

Virginia? Good luck after spiting Webb on the first one.

Maryland? Rhode Island? Cali?

President Mitt Romney's nominations to the Supreme Court in his two terms:

• Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison Eid for David Souter in 2009

• (Attorney General) Miguel Estrada for John Paul Stevens in 2011

• Judge Margaret Ryan of the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces for Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2013

• (Solicitor General) R. Ted Cruz for Anthony Kennedy in 2014

• Dean Jim Chen for Antonin Scalia in 2015

Chief Justice John Roberts (George W. Bush)
Justice Clarence Thomas (George H.W. Bush)
Justice Stephen Breyer (Bill Clinton)
Justice Samuel Alito (George W. Bush)
Justice Allison Eid (Mitt Romney)
Justice Miguel Estrada (Mitt Romney)
Justice Margaret Ryan (Mitt Romney)
Justice R. Ted Cruz (Mitt Romney)
Justice Jim Chen (Mitt Romney)

Just think about all the bad law that could be systematically undone by that court. :-)

With all due respect, BananaRepublican, all your nominees seem like quota picks. Eid has no business on the Supreme Court in '09, in my opinion. (Though she should be put on the 10th Circuit stat).

I think the most likely scenario if the GOP prevails is a Giuliani presidency. Maybe he would make Cruz or Estrada Solicitor General. I think Mahoney has a decent chance as his first appointment. And then Cruz or Estrada (whichever one he makes SG, following this scenario) would get the next opening. The earliest Cruz could be appointed would be '10, when he'd be 40.

Given a Senate that will likely have around 55 dems I highly doubt all of those owuld be confirmed, or that all those liberals would retire under a GOP president, especially one like Romney who's vowed to reverse Roe.

More likely is that one of Ginsburg or Stevens has to leave between 2009-2013 and Scalia also steps down during that timeframe to allow the GOP to refresh his seat.

I think Souter would hold out at least until 2012 hoping the dems get in, although if there's already 5 conservatives he may figure that there's no point anymore and just walk away.

Another possible scenario(under a Rudy administration):
Solicitor General Miguel Estrada for Justice Stevens
Professor Steven Calabresi for Justice Scalia
Judge Diane Sykes or Judge Janice Rogers Brown(although Sykes is 8 yrs younger and way more confirmable) for Justice Ginsburg

esp. re Romney election and the retirements of Souter, Stevens and Ginsberg. I'm sure he'd put solid conservatives in for them as well as any conservatives who retire.

Carried over from previous thread:

From Lat's liveblog:

The two justices who missed the festivities: John Paul Stevens and Anthony M. Kennedy.)

Not Kennedy, but was Stevens ill? Just in Florida? C'mon, we need some kind of fever swamp these days!

[Note: Andrew spoke to good health of Kennedy. But Stevens?...]

...and they have every bit of business being on the Supreme Court. They are brilliant, conservative, qualified, and don't forget - the Supreme Court is chosen by the presidency, a political branch of government.

You could probably name a ton of excellent pedigreed white male potential justices and I have a few favorites myself (Gregory Coleman, Peter Keisler, William Pryor, Paul Clement, Michael McConnell,and Neil Gorsuch), but if racking up political points is what it takes to get staunch conservatives on the court with diversity picks, then I'm fine with that. Because while you can argue that any of those white men would be as good as my list of potential supreme court nominees, it is difficult to argue that any of them would really be BETTER.

And they'd ALL be much, MUCH better than a Justice Maureen Mahoney (shiver) or a Justice Alex Kozinski.

And at the end of the day, this is about getting a judicial philosophy seated on the bench more than just the particular people. Three Thomas clerks + Cruz + Estrada would certainly do that.

Courtesy of How Appealing:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ACCIDENTAL_ATTORNEY_GENERAL?SITE=...

"By most accounts, Keisler already has helped to soothe a Justice Department roiled by political scandal and the sudden resignations of more than a dozen top officials - including former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

"He has been a terrific leader for this time," Michael Garcia, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said Monday of Keisler. "He's a very calm and knowledgeable hand on the tiller as we're going forward."

Keisler declined to be interviewed for this article, saying through a spokesman that the spotlight should be on Mukasey, and not himself."

"Keisler, a conservative, is praised as a brilliant attorney - even by those who oppose the policies he defends in court.

"He's got a sterling reputation," said Jonathan Hafetz of the Brennan Center, who has argued against civil attorneys Keisler oversaw in the Bush administration's lengthy legal fight over the rights of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

The Justice Department's argument that Guantanamo detainees have no rights "is indefensible from a legal and moral standpoint," Hafetz said. "But Peter is a lawyer for the government. My disagreement is not with him - it's with the position that they have.""

NY Times Editorial Board blog has quite a few pro-Southwick comments in response to the Board’s posting on Southwick making out of the SJC alive.

http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/dianne-feinsteins-vote-for-...

It continues to amaze me that Mitt Romney has so much support among the judicial conservative base. Whether it's gay marriage, abortion, or universal health care, Mitt has always been on the liberal side. Just because he say he's a conservative now means nothing. Hillary will beat him like a drum in 2008 (Sorry Hugh) and everyone's hopes of a conservative Court will be gone for a generation.

And look who won that in 1992. I just say that to point out that the election is far from a foregone conclusion today. And when you put up Mitt Romney next to Hillary Clinton, I just can't believe that people would actually vote for Hillary or abstain from Mitt in order to allow Comrade Clinton become president. I just find that very difficult to imagine when there is so much to like about Mitt.

He is brilliant (with an MBA and a JD from Harvard), he is attractive and likeable, he preaches a conservative message, and he has a great record as governor of Massachusetts (with the exception of the RomneyCare scheme - which he has pledged to not push on a national level).

I also think that Mitt's record of keeping campaign promises once in office is actually quite good, and that his chief judicial adviser is a former Thomas clerk is a very good sign. Especially since three of my favorite potential SCOTUS nominees (Allison Eid, Margaret Ryan, and Jim Chen) are all former Thomas clerks, also.

While Giuliani has Ted Olson and Miguel Estrada on his advisory team, so are Maureen Mahoney and Michael Mukasey - who are probably at least slightly if not markedly to the left of Anthony Kennedy.

And Giuliani's record of getting conservative judges on the NYC courts is abysmal, although there were certainly constraints to getting great conservatives on those courts just as Romney had some process impediments in Massachusetts. The difference seems to be that Giuliani brags about his judges as if they're the best thing since sliced bread while Romney seems to concede that his were simply the best he could do given the circumstances of having to get them through a board that was 7/8ths Democrat-controlled.

And I have switched back to Romney over Fred Thompson (or flip-flopped, some might say) because I was incredibly unimpressed with Thompson's performance at the economic debate. Not only did I find Thompson to be incredibly dull at that debate, but it also seemed clear to me that only two candidates had a commanding understanding of the economy: Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.

And of those two, one sounds conservative on nearly every issue and the other sounds conservative on very few issues outside of national security and the economy.

And even then, only Mitt Romney has signed the pledge to not raise taxes. Seems to me that if Rudy believed in the economic message that he preaches so articulately, he would go ahead and sign the pledge.

I hate to admit this, but I also like that Mitt Romney has the most stable family life of the crowd. When facing the turbulent waters that a president must face at times, it is nice to know that he has a strong family standing with him when he gets home.

Mitt Romney is not my ideal candidate, for sure. In this field, there is no ideal candidate, unfortunately. But from where I stand, Mitt Romney seems to be as good as it gets. So, I'm going to support him in the primary and encourage others to do likewise.

Then, in the general, I will support whoever the nominee is.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071016-5.html

12:38 P.M. EDT

MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. Welcome back to the briefing room after a long weekend. A couple of announcements, and then we'll go to questions.

President Bush has a constitutional responsibility to nominate excellent judges to serve in America's courthouses. It's one he takes very seriously. The Senate also has an important responsibility to act on the President's nominations. The Senate has only confirmed four of our circuit court nominees since January of 2007. The historical average is to confirm 17 nominees in the last two years of an administration.

On August 2nd, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted Judge Leslie Southwick, a nominee for the Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, out of committee with a favorable bipartisan vote. And as the full Senate prepares to vote on his nomination, we encourage all members of the Senate to swiftly confirm Judge Southwick. He is a highly respected attorney with an extensive record of public service as a judge and military officer.

I wonder if a Southwick vote is imminent. Since Alito was confirmed, the White House has rarely said much about judicial nominees.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20071016/D8SAITM00.html

Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas says that she today she is retiring, possibly even before her present Senate term is up in 2012. Thank heavens Texas is a red state that looks to stay red! I wish the same could be said for Colorado and Virginia.

"She said running for Texas governor in 2010 is one option but she has not made a decision."

""I will be looking at what is best for Texas. If giving someone a lead on seniority is an option, if I ran for governor, I would try to do that in a way that was most advantageous to a person who would be coming in and representing Texas," Hutchison told reporters outside the U.S. Senate."

"If she does run for governor and wins, once she steps down as senator a temporary appointment would be made by the governor to fill the Senate seat until an election is held."

You are doing what some people, unfortunately, have said they will not do. You are voting for your guy in the primary, but then voting for the R nominee in the general. It's just a shame that some people will not do that. Way to go.

I concur re Romney. He received both degrees from Harvard the same year! Business magna cum laude.

Don't sell him short in the General, either.

FYI, a nominee today for a District Court seat in Arkansas. That's apparently all for today.

endorsing romney.

"What most people really object to when they object to a free market is that it is so hard for them to shape it to their own will. At the bottom of many criticisms of the market economy is really lack of belief in freedom itself."

-- Milton Friedman

If Romney as a Mormon can win over the crazy radical fundamentalist wackos (and I say this as someone who attends a Southern Baptist church weekly - Bob Jones Univ. is just scary), winning over the independents should be a piece of cake for Romney. lol

"What most people really object to when they object to a free market is that it is so hard for them to shape it to their own will. At the bottom of many criticisms of the market economy is really lack of belief in freedom itself."

-- Milton Friedman

10am ET on C-SPAN2. One can only guess how much of a circus this will be.

Appoint George W. Bush to the open Texas Senate seat.

There would be a total revolt everywhere outside of Texas, but Dubya would hold that seat until he died if he wanted it.

As a BJU grad, I found your characterization of my alma mater disappointing. The tens of thousands of people who have attended and graduated from Bob Jones University are neither "crazy radical fundamental wackos" nor are we "scary".

Unfortunately, it has become politically correct and acceptable to lob lazy verbal assaults at a fine institution just because everybody else does.

The reality is that Bob Jones University has an outstanding reputation within its local community - by the people who know BJU best. Local businesses, schools, hospitals, and other organizations seek out BJU grads for their integrity, high ethical standards, academic excellence, strong work ethic, and so on.

Yes, we are conservative Christians who take the Bible literally - guilty as charged. And while ours may be the minority world view in this country, it hardly makes us "wackos". In fact, most BJU folks passionately share this site's committment to confirming good conservative judges. I personally wrote letters during the Harriet Miers debacle and was very gratified to see Roberts and Alito confirmed.

I know this is off topic, but I wanted to set the record straight.

Any university that kicks out someone for going to a 4Him concert is run by wackos. I'm sorry.

The Bible does not "literally" proscribe going to contemporary Christian music concerts or interracial dating - something the school banned until the 21st century (which I also find scary.)

I more or less defended the school because I thought that they were probably being persecuted by the liberal media. But the more I learn about the school, the more frightening I find it.

I'm sure that if I knew more about the school that there would be even MORE extra-Biblical and contra-Biblical practices that would cause even the little old ladies at the rural First Baptist Church I grew up in to gasp.

I don't know who "4Him" is nor am I aware of the incident you described. However, BJU is a private university. You have to play by their rules. The parents who send their children to BJU are in alignment with the school philosophically and expect adherence to and enforcement of the rules. What is wrong with that? Frankly, we need more of that insistence from both parents and schools at all levels of education. I'm sure the "little old ladies" at your rural First Baptist Church would agree.

Regarding the interacial dating rule that is no longer, I don't know a BJU grad who wasn't happy to see that rule scrapped because it didn't reflect the views of either the student body or faculty. The rule was a relic of the past that should have been dispensed with decades ago. I can't defend the university's past position on this matter. However, the administration should get credit for discarding the rule.

Your last paragraph reveals that you have already made up your mind regarding BJU, so I don't expect my words to change your opinion. I also don't expect you to agree with BJU's positions on these matters. However, you can be a little more civil and respectful in your disagreement.

If you haven't seen it yet, check out Viet Dinh hosting C-Span's Afterwords, with the guest being none other than Naomi Wolf, discussing her book "The End of America." Ms. Wolf believes we are headed down the path towards a totalitarian government and the tension with Dinh is palpable, although she clearly has much more animosity towards him than the other way around. A fascinating interview, if for his questions more than her responses.

www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=8653&SectionName=After%20Words&Pla...

______________________________________
"Our job is to bash the president"
Newsweek's Evan Thomas, on the role of the MSM