Print This Post Print This Post

May

5

On SCOTUS nominees


Number 1: There are actually people who think about whether someone is fat or not when thinking about who they want on the Supreme Court of the United States.  Thank you to Feministe for bringing that ridiculous focus on one’s figure as a prereq for being a jurist to our attention.  Unbelievable.  And I’m with commenter #7 who says, these people aren’t even “fat.”  Deep groaning oy.

Number 2: I am 100% certain that there are more than enough qualified women to be selected and approved by the Senate, in addition to enough qualified men.  I very much would like President Obama to select a woman, including a woman of color, but I’m cautious about also prioritizing what that woman’s personal preferences are. I want, and believe we need someone who knows how to apply the law and can anticipate as much about the future as possible, as a general rule.  The Plain Dealer’s editorial today actually does a nice job of cutting out the shape:

Obama says he will look for a nominee who shares Souter’s “sharp and independent mind” and who also understands how the law affects the lives of ordinary people. Given the current court’s makeup, he may also feel some urgency to add a second woman, a second African-American or perhaps a first-ever justice of Hispanic or Asian descent. Added perspectives would strengthen the court.

So would a wider range of experiences. Every sitting justice came from the appellate bench. None has ever held elected office or served on a local trial court. By contrast, Earl Warren and Sandra Day O’Connor had a strong sense of what works and what the public would accept because they had been in politics. In replacing Souter, Obama would be wise to define diversity broadly.

While I love decisions that result in the protection and enforcement and endorsement of my preferences, ultimately, the legal reasoning and standards used must hold up, they must.

There are plenty of lists around, and lists are good as a starting point.  But ultimately, the selection must be someone who can be nominated and confirmed.  This is the point at which I feel we’ve elected people to do their job and to cherish our trust to do that job. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the president and the Senators embrace and cherish that trust too.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:22 pm May 5th, 2009 in Barack Obama, Courts, Gender, Government, Law, Politics, Women, democracy, leadership, senate 

Comments

One Response to “On SCOTUS nominees”

  1. 1 Holly on May 17th, 2009 2:35 pm

    Aside from possible age considerations, is there any reason not to reappoint Sandra Day O’Connor now that her husband (whose illness was the reason for her retirement) has died?

Leave a Reply




"));