ConfirmThem

By DanCT Posted in SCOTUS — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Will this President really go back on his pledge to nominate Supreme Justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas and give the nod to Gonzales? Lefties like Kos like the idea: "My choice would be Alberto Gonzales, torture lover that he is. Fact is, he would be the most likely to become the next Souter."

The Constitution gives the President the sole power to nominate the judges because, as Hamilton puts it in Federalist Papers (#76): "The sole and undivided responsibility of one man will naturally beget a livelier sense of duty and a more exact regard to reputation. He will, on this account, feel himself under stronger obligations, and more interested to investigate with care the qualities requisite to the stations to be filled, and to prefer with impartiality the persons who may have the fairest pretensions to them. He will have FEWER personal attachments to gratify, than a body of men who may each be supposed to have an equal number; and will be so much the less liable to be misled by the sentiments of friendship and of affection."

The Senate, though, has the power to reject nomination because, as Hamilton further explains, " that power is "an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity."

The "Advice and Consent" clause is included in the Constitution expressly as a check against cronyism of a President who, blinded by personal loyalties, nominates a friend rather than giving primary consideration to the best person for the job.

If Gonzales is nominated, the Senate should exercise that check.

Personally, I believe the President to be a man of his word and will nominate someone in the mold of Scalia and Thomas -- and not Gonzales. Indications are that next Friday we will know more.