If Ginsburg Leaves...
The sad news that Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is being treated for pancreatic cancer raises the possibility that President Obama may face his first Supreme Court nomination sooner than anyone imagined. Ginsburg, a thoughtful liberal, named to the bench by Bill Clinton in 1993, has many friends and admirers in Washington and people wish her well and hope she can stay in her post.
Still, the speculation has already begun in the Beltway about who could be named to the post. Since there is only one woman on the nine-member panel, the president would be under enormous pressure to make sure the court doesn't become all-male for the first time since 1981 when Sandra Day O'Connor was sworn in. Since Ginsburg was a leading womens rights advocate there would be all the more pressure on Obama to name a woman.
Among the possible female candidates the president could consider are Elena Kagan, the Harvard Law School dean who has been named to be solicitor general. Nancy Gertner, a district court judge in Massachusetts. If Obama's interested in returning to the historic tradition of appointing a politician to the bench, the possibilities include Jennifer Granholm, the governor of Michigan and a Harvard Law School graduate and former state attorney general. Janet Napolitano is the former attorney general and governor of Arizona and now Secretary of Homeland Security. Diane Wood is a federal judge in Chicago. Sonia Sotomayer, a federal judge in New York, if named, would be the first Hispanic justice. The aborted nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court in 2005 suggests that the Senate and public would not settle for a second-class nominee just for gender reasons but there's no reason to think that Obama, a former Constitutional law professor, would be interested in a personal friend over a widely respected figure.














I wonder if possible candidates are scrutinizing their tax returns?
February 5, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn. You think maybe that's why I haven't gotten my pony yet?
February 5, 2009 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course they are because who ever has to worst tax evasion will get the nod.
February 5, 2009 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a very bad joke let me remind everyone that Alberto Gonzales is looking for a job.
February 5, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm glad it's just a joke, aren't you, mark? :)
February 5, 2009 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, therap, I gotta million of 'em.
February 5, 2009 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Justice Ginsberg's cancer was caught really early, as part of a routine screening she recieves since she is a cancer survivor (colon cancer I believe). Pancreatic cancer is usually a death sentence because it is usually caught only after it's too late.
So speaking in generalities, I had a thought Elena Kagan's confirmation as Solicitor General could be used to pretty much force her confirmation as SCOTUS justice down the line.
February 5, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet that's one of the reasons the GOP is fighting Kagan's nomination to be SG; they know that confirming Kagan as SG will make it easier for her to be confirmed for the Court.
February 5, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kagan would be great choice. Talk about watching Rethuglicans' heads exploding! It'd sound like a giant popcorn popper from coast to coast. On second thought, due to the air-headedness of the aforementioned, I guess it would be more akin to a million popping balloons, albeit very evil balloons.
February 5, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not just because pancreatic cancer is usually caught late but depending on what end of the pancreas it's on it can be very hard to operate on. My uncle died of it. If I remember correctly John Hopkins has about the best surgical team.
February 5, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is correct.
If the cancer is on the head of the pancreas, it is lethal no matter what. If it is caught early, well you may have an added couple of months to live vs. those caught late but its over eventually either way.
February 5, 2009 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what Steve Jobs had.
February 5, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harriet Myers debacle was in 2005, not 1995. And I am still of the opinion that Reid et al. should have publicly pushed harder for her once she was nominated, under the theory that she couldn't have been worse than any nominee to follow her, especially in the aftermath of her withdrawal, when the wingnuts were salivating. And look who we ended up with...Alito. Whatever Myers' pluses and minuses, I'd rather see her on the bench than Alito. Doubt she would be totally glued to Scalia's hip like Alito is...
February 5, 2009 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope she recovers fully and she is in my prayers. I thank her for staying thru the hellish Bush years and for her work on behalf of women. She has had to put w/ Clarence Thomas for all these years!
February 5, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very bad taste to be going into this speculation at this time. Very bad taste. We should be wishing her well and hopefully a speedy recovery, not speculating on her replacement. Very bad taste.
February 5, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree. I think it's perfectly natural to discuss her replacement. I wish her well, but she has a difficult road ahead. Pancreatic cancer, even if caught early, is pretty bleak news, especially at 75. Let's wish her well, but let's also be realistic about her prognosis and get to work discussing the dynamics at play in considering her replacement.
February 5, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she decides to relinquish her post for medical reasons, I sure hope Obama doesn't feel the need for bi-partisanship and appoint a anti pro-choice, religious fanatic who's intent it is to convert all gays to heterosexuality and rid the earth of four letter words just for the sake of having a healthy discussion in the courts.
February 5, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nominate, not appoint.
February 5, 2009 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
there's no reason to think that Obama, a former Constitutional law professor, would be interested in a personal friend over a widely respected figure
Actually, his personal friends include some elite legal scholars.
Unlike some Presidents I could name.
February 5, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oooh...oohh...lemme guess...lemme guess!
February 5, 2009 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please pick someone relatively young :P
I want the country to feel the effects of Obama's Supreme Court for decades upon decades.
February 5, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I couldn't agree more. AT a minimum, the next 5 picks to the court should be young, under 45, women with lots of color in there.
The one thing those majority lily white right wing bastards (that means you too Thomas) on the court HATE is having to work with people who resemble their household help.
February 6, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sonia Sotomayer is in New York genius. Second Circuit.
February 5, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I hope she lives long enough for Obama to recover from postpartisanship or he might put a faith based Pentecostal on the Court.
February 5, 2009 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope it's not a Republican. With Obama one can't be sure.
February 5, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama should nominate Lanie Guiner just to drive the wingnuts batty.
February 6, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's Sonia Sotomayor, not Sotomayer.
According to Wikipedia, she's 54 years old. Baseball fans will remember her as the judge who basically ended the 1994-95 strike by finding that the owners had not bargained to an impasse in good faith.
February 6, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink