| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2004/12/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:35221 Activity:very high |
12/8 Is it known who would replace Rehnquist when he dies? Would
a current justice become chief and a new justice appointed,
or would they appoint a new chief justice directly?
\- the president could do either. rhenquist would probably resign
before dying. even thurgood marshall resigned inspite of saying
"i was appointed to a life sentence and i intend to serve it".
if the chief is out of comission for a while, the senior justice,
john paul stevens, would assume some responsibilities. oconnor
would be a fine chief but is probably too close to retiring herself.
people keep talking about scalia being elevated, which seems crazy
to me, but that certainly hasnt stopped bushco. even worse would
be putting ashcroft on the supct. the other people being discussed
you would probably not be familiar with unless you follow this
closely. --psb
\_ http://www.theonion.com/opinion/index.php?issue=4049
\_ Bush will probably nominate Posner (7th Circuit) for the the
vacancy rather than promote any of the existing justices.
\- Posner would be cool. Easterbrook would be ok. But the names
I've been hearing more are nutjobs. Where did you hear the
Posner rumor? Posner wrote some well publicized stuff on
intelligence reform and is very much the opposite of a
stealth justice, so that may alienate some right wing
support. i think the democrats may go for him because
he is not totally crazy, and in this climate he looks
pretty good. --psb
\_ Not sure where I heard the Posner rumor, but he
seems like the best overall choice to take over
as CJ b/c (1) he is widely regarded as the
smartest judge in the federal judiciary (sort of
like a modern Cardozo or Holmes), (2) he would
face the least opposition in the senate, (3) the
rest of the USSC would likely accept him as CJ
w/o reservations.
Easterbrook (also 7th Circuit) would probably
not be as easy a nomination b/c he has made
some crazy decisions in the past.
\-i was suggesting resistance to posner would come
from the right, not the left. "best choice" !=
"likely bush nominee"...q.v. bush41 & "clarence thomas,
the best qualified man for the job" --psb
\_ Just to keep the record straight, C.T. was chosen
only after a qualified justice was rejected by the
congress.
\_ Who?
\_ just chedked out the bios of the justices online, they all either
went to harvard law or stanford law. what, are those schools
that much better than all other law schools? or is this also a
good ol' boys club?
\_ Yes, we need one from Boalt. And I know the perfect guy:
(future) Supreme Court Chief Justice John C. Yoo!
(and Dubya's future new favorite justice)
Both Yoo and Thomas strictly interpret the Constitution, not
legislate from the bench! </troll>
\_ You are not seriously this naive, are you?
\_ I realize its kind of a naive question but it is an
interesting observation still to me. and I wasn't
implying that someone from boalt should be chosen. |
| 5/24 |
|
| www.theonion.com/opinion/index.php?issue=4049 OPINION Son, We Need To Talk About This Supreme Court Obsession Of Yours Chuck Lager By Chuck Lager Advertisement Son, could you come in here for a second? Well, I'm sorry, but that newsp aper's just going to have to wait, because we really need to talk. Your grades have been sli pping, you've been spending less time with your friends, and you've been shutting yourself in your room for hours at a time. Now, I know it may make you feel uncomfortable to talk about it, but this Supreme Court obs ession of yours has become a problem. You can debate with me and defend yourself all you want, but it's evident to your mother and me that your interest borders on unhealthy. You lie awake at night making up fantas y scenarios about what kind of decisions William Rehnquist might make in the matter of Jill L Brown, Acting Warden v Charles Payton. I mean, y ou get more excited about the first Monday in October than your friends do about Super Bowl Sunday! Son, you shouldn't plan your life around the start of the new Supreme Court term. Okay, name one thing you do, besides sleeping or eating, that doesn't inv olve the Supreme Court. If you had your way, you'd be up in your room, cutting pictures of your favorite justices out of the Washington Post to add to your mural, which is another thing we need to discuss. It's perfectly natural to go through a Supreme Court phase. I remember spending hours in the libra ry poring over orders of the Court. I spent nights lying in bed imaginin g I was presiding with Warren Burger or John Jay. I even had quite a col lection of court drawings from the Furman v Georgia case thatwell, I t hink I was able to get them because my friend's dad knew someone who kne w a lawyer. But here's the difference: Even though I was an enormous fan of the Supre me Court, I had other interests. I k ept up on the appellate and state courts and played basketball with frie nds. I had some of my favorite opinions up on the wall, much like you do , but I also had a couple of pictures of hot rods and a poster of Mia Fa rrow. Look at your roomthere's nothing but collages of court justices t hrough the years. Your floor is covered with printouts of opinions and d issents. You spend all night on the Internet holding mock Supreme Court hearings in the chat rooms. I don't want to say it's not normal, but I d o think it's behavior we need to evaluate. Do you think we do n't know when Court TV airs major Supreme Court decisions? Son, everybod y is interested in what the Supreme Court has to say, but you can't skip school just so you can watch the outcome of United States v Galetti. W hy can't you be more like everyone else and read it the next day on page 42 in the newspaper? Your mother and I thought if we talked to you, we might be able to show y ou just how far you've sunk into this Supreme Court obsession. We're taking awa y your computer, and I'm going to talk to the school librarian, so if yo u think you can look at Supreme Court information at school, you've got another think coming. If I catch you with so much as a stay application, you'll be grounded for a month! You're still free to read about the appellate courts, and of course I won 't take your law reviews. But if you behave, m aybe your mother and I will let you have your copy of Closed Chambers af ter a month or two. This isn't easy for me, either, but crying isn't goi ng to help. Let's see if you can stay away from the Supreme Court for si x months. The Supreme Court is the most important judicial bo dy in America, but it isn't everything. I'm sure you'll find plenty of t hings to occupy your time. Well, you'd better, because for the next six months, you are going to be Antonin Scalia and Sandra Day O'Connor-free, whether you like it or not. |