Sandra D O'C.

July 13, 2005 2:04 PM

Bush says he may consider non-judges to replace Sandra Day O'Connor.Is it time to panic? Is the terrbile prediction of a Justice Ann Coulter made in this thread coming one step closer to being realized? Buckle up Either way, because Rehnquest has been hospitalized as well.
posted by piratebowling (66 comments total)

So Coulter gets nominated and as soon as she does, TADAAA, she
flip-flops and reveals that she's a hardcore liberal that has been
infiltrating for years before she could play it out big.

I mean, it could happen, right?
posted by NewBornHippy at 2:15 PM on July 13, 2005

actually, a justice ann coulter doesn't seem too far fetched.

1. consider what happened during the filibuster deal: the republicans got more or less everything they wanted, but were attacked by their core membership as having caved in.

2. the quagmire that is iraq.

3. the free man that is osama bin laden.

4. a miserable domestic record and moribund domestic agenda.

to my way of thinking, all of this adds up the need for a diversion, something to occupy the press, to paint the democrats as obstructionist nay-sayers without any agenda, and pander to the religious right without whom the republican party looses its majority across the board.

maybe ann coulter is a stretch, but i fully expect herr bush to nominate someone to the far right of robert bork.
posted by three blind mice at 2:18 PM on July 13, 2005

Is it time to panic?

Is there any other way?
posted by Necker at 2:24 PM on July 13, 2005

Rehnquist had not been a judge until he joined SCOTUS.

Then again there are many who aren't overly enthused by the idea of another Rehnquist in the first place.
posted by clevershark at 2:33 PM on July 13, 2005

It's not particularly unusual for a non-judge to be appointed to the Supreme Court. Earl Warren wasn't a judge prior to his appointment. Neither was John Marshall, for that matter. Or Rehnquist. And that's just chief justices, off the top of my head.

I don't understand why this particular detail would send you off in a panic.
posted by mr_roboto at 2:34 PM on July 13, 2005

Oh, oh, pick me!! Pick me!!
posted by Elpoca at 2:40 PM on July 13, 2005

Karl Rove might be looking for work soon. That's a neat trick, eh?
posted by diastematic at 2:43 PM on July 13, 2005

Karl Rove must know that is last best chance for survival would be to get Bush to nominate somebody truly insane.
posted by washburn at 2:44 PM on July 13, 2005

Where do I submit my resume to be considered for this position? I am at least as qualified as Ann "Hate Speech" Coulter.

diastematic, you bite your tongue! And don't give Shrub any ideas either.
posted by fenriq at 2:44 PM on July 13, 2005

The problem with picking a non-judge is, without a long list of decisions, you have no idea how they would rule on issues.

Get ready for Justice Karl rove.
posted by delmoi at 2:45 PM on July 13, 2005

Well, IF Bush actually wants to fill the vacant position (and maybe soon both of them) on SCOTUS he'll have to do better than what everyone here is considering as a nightmare scenario...

He's already in enough sh*t over the Bolton issue, the last thing he needs now is a repeat of that fiasco. At this point I would go so far as to say that if his first candidate can't at least be seen as a uniting figure he'll find it very tough to get anything done for the remainder of his term -- and 3+ years is a long time to be a lame duck.

Political capital isn't like the finances of the federal government -- once you're in deficit territory you can't just keep spending.
posted by clevershark at 2:52 PM on July 13, 2005

Louis Brandais, William Douglas, Felix Frankfurter....

Just a short sampling of non-judge appointees off the top of my head.

No reason to panic.
posted by mygoditsbob at 2:53 PM on July 13, 2005

Ashcroft.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 2:57 PM on July 13, 2005

This is their ticket out of Rove's current debacle.

The emerging GOP strategy -- devised by Mehlman and other Rove loyalists outside of the White House -- is to try to undermine those Democrats calling for Rove's ouster, play down Rove's role and wait for President Bush's forthcoming Supreme Court selection to drown out the controversy, according to several high-level Republicans....
Washington Post | July 13, 2005

As linked in the discussion about Rove by ericb
posted by Freen at 3:00 PM on July 13, 2005

Lou Dobbs - a man of the people!!
posted by billysumday at 3:01 PM on July 13, 2005

clevershark, someone might want to remind Bush of that fact about political capital.
posted by fenriq at 3:02 PM on July 13, 2005

I'd like to see either Nixon's Head or Zombie Reagan, personally. Vote for Nixon's Head-- tanned, rested, and ready.
posted by keswick at 3:14 PM on July 13, 2005

He even made a point of mentioning that he's considering women.

Women.

Damn. A uniter, indeed.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 3:18 PM on July 13, 2005

"Laura gave me some good advice yesterday, which is to consider women. Which, of course I'm doing." First Lady Laura Bush said she would be pleased if the president nominated a woman to fill Justice O'Connor's seat.

so would o'connor :D

Would you like to see a woman take your place, or do you think it will be nice to see another woman?

JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR: I hope there will always be women, plural, on this court.

quotas!
posted by kliuless at 3:18 PM on July 13, 2005

Monica Lewinsky isn't a judge...
posted by R. Mutt at 3:27 PM on July 13, 2005

Justice Bill Clinton?
posted by Jezztek at 3:29 PM on July 13, 2005

Is there dgree for "Judge"?

I guess experience in other courts is a good idea.
posted by tomplus2 at 3:29 PM on July 13, 2005

But Condi would an interesting nomination.
posted by R. Mutt at 3:30 PM on July 13, 2005

It's going to be me.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:31 PM on July 13, 2005

Justice Schwarzenegger has a nice ring to it.
posted by NewBornHippy at 3:35 PM on July 13, 2005

Huh. Ann Coulter. From commedienne to Supreme Court Justice. Who says the American Dream is dead?
posted by eyeballkid at 3:39 PM on July 13, 2005

I made this prediction elsewhere and I shall reiterate it here, that you may all marvel at my prescience and shower me with letter bombs when the time comes. Alan Keyes. Supreme Court. You just watch.
posted by furiousthought at 3:41 PM on July 13, 2005

Regarding Bush's track record ( EPA, Energy, etc.) the only guarantee is the nominee will be a sleazebag.
Present company excluded *looks at monju bosatsu, then a uncomfortable silence prevails*
posted by uni verse at 3:41 PM on July 13, 2005

Hey, Mr. President...pick me, pick me! I can learn on the job.
posted by alumshubby at 4:10 PM on July 13, 2005

Why doesn't Bush just try to get himself the title of Justice too?

JUSTICE-PRESIDENT

Sounds like a superhero!
posted by TwelveTwo at 4:16 PM on July 13, 2005

Who of the Iraq planners/implementers hasn't been rewarded yet?
Supreme Court Justice Perle?

I heard Olsen's definitely up for one of the spots.
posted by amberglow at 4:19 PM on July 13, 2005

This is disgusting: "Someone from the White House called me yesterday, asking for any input I might have," said the Rev. Jerry Falwell, the founder of the Moral Majority and chancellor of Liberty University in Virginia.
posted by amberglow at 4:20 PM on July 13, 2005

Justice Guckert! It's not as if they haven't put him where he lacks the credentials to be before. And besides, can anyone reallly argue that we don't need a gay prostitute on the supreme court?
posted by George_Spiggott at 4:26 PM on July 13, 2005

Fred Phelps!
posted by breath at 4:28 PM on July 13, 2005

Why doesn't Bush just try to get himself the title of Justice too?

I know you were just snarking, but there actually have been Supreme Court cases basically saying that you can't have that type of mixed hat. You have to wait until after you're done being President (ie, Taft) before you can be on the Court. But, hey, why bother fighting with facts?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 4:29 PM on July 13, 2005

Justice Scalia "taught" my con law class one day this spring and he remarked that he thinks that there are way too many already-been-judges not only on the Supreme Court, but also being nominated for the courts of appeals. I don't agree with him on much, but I think he's right about this. Though there are some definite nightmare possibilities when you nominate a non-judge to be a Justice (if you're Eisenhower, CJ Warren was just such a nightmare), the bench, and law in general, are these days way too far removed from the real world. It might be nice to see, for instance, a former legislator who might know something about compromise, on the bench.
posted by leecifer at 4:29 PM on July 13, 2005

This is pretty dumb; there's absolutely no requirement that Supreme Court judges have been judges previously. I don't know too much about U.S. judges, but here in Canada we've had good ones who were in private practice, and less good ones who were on other courts before. The Supreme Court can be very different from other levels of courts, so having prior experience on the bench often isn't all that useful (though I think appeals experience can't hurt at all).

Karl Rove isn't a lawyer, so he won't be considered. Coulter does have her JD, so it's a possibility, but she only practiced for 4 years, I think, and so it seems highly unlikely you could consider her qualified enough for the position either. But someone who's been a prosecutor, in private practice, etc. might very well be a good choice (on preview, sort of like leecifer is saying, other than that I don't agree with the "out of touch" bit about judges at all.)

Though, the "women" bit - hardy har har, Georgie.
posted by livii at 4:36 PM on July 13, 2005

But, hey, why bother fighting with facts?

Precisely, we are starting to talk politics on the internet here.
posted by TwelveTwo at 4:37 PM on July 13, 2005

It's gonna be Giuliani. Lawyer: check. Not yet gotten his prize: check.
posted by mkultra at 4:51 PM on July 13, 2005

> I heard Olsen's definitely up for one of the spots.

Is there any age limit for the court? Because I'd really like to see Mary-Kate and Ashley up there. Women, plural.
posted by jfuller at 4:51 PM on July 13, 2005

It doesn't unflatten my affect.

I like the sound of President-Justice--it's like he's a comic book hero. Activate the Straussian ray--we're going in....

A former legislator--wasn't this the rap on O'Connor--that because she had been a politician before she became a judged and she trimmed her sails according to the politics of the emerging social consensus regarding whatever the case at hand was about ?

The nightmare Earl Waren caused Eisenhower concerned Brown v. The Board of Education. De-segregation begins. Warren persuaded the less enthused on the court into agreeing to a unanimous decision. [that was good]

Mary Kate and Ashley. Next someone will suggest Oprah. Then Brad and Jen. Then Tom and Xenu. Then Joe Lieberman. Then Bat Boy. The horror, the horror....
posted by y2karl at 5:01 PM on July 13, 2005

I know you were just snarking, but there actually have been Supreme Court cases basically saying that you can't have that type of mixed hat. You have to wait until after you're done being President (ie, Taft) before you can be on the Court. But, hey, why bother fighting with facts?

I think Bush v. Gore clearly invalidated this precident.
posted by delmoi at 5:03 PM on July 13, 2005

Oh man, Justice Bat-Boy would make for some crazy photo-ops!
posted by Balisong at 5:53 PM on July 13, 2005

Unless there's a clause that specifically prohibits it, why wouldn't he give Robert Bork another shot? Then he could one up even the Gipper!
posted by psmealey at 6:05 PM on July 13, 2005

Oh man, Justice Bat-Boy would make for some crazy photo-ops!

He certainly would spice up oral arguments.

And the President could pander to that substantial Bat Boy Republican coughSteve_At_Linwoodcough demographic in the base by nominating him.
posted by y2karl at 7:06 PM on July 13, 2005

If it's a woman, does she have to be "annointed" by Justice Thomas?

"Hey, who has put a pubic hair in this Crisco?"
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:08 PM on July 13, 2005

pleasepleasepleasenotphyllisschlafleypleaseplease...
posted by cookie-k at 7:36 PM on July 13, 2005

It's gonna be Giuliani.

Isn't he pro-choice? There's no way Bush's going to appoint someone pro-choice.
posted by callmejay at 7:49 PM on July 13, 2005

Justice Condoleeza Rice.
posted by Count Ziggurat at 7:57 PM on July 13, 2005

nah, they're saving Condi to take Cheney's place.
posted by amberglow at 8:09 PM on July 13, 2005

A good analogy to this situation is a family with a car that is about to give up the ghost, and that has delegated the choice of a replacement to their nine-year-old whose knowledge of cars comes from playing "Carmageddon" dozens of times and blowing up plastic hot rods with firecrackers.
posted by Creosote at 8:10 PM on July 13, 2005

There's one more real judge we have to worry about: John Bates from the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C
posted by amberglow at 8:22 PM on July 13, 2005

POTUS should pick Judge Reinhold. He has a distinguished distiguished career in law enforcement as evidenced in "Beverly Hills Cop", not to mention appellate experience in "Beverly Hills Cop 2" and "Beverly Hills Cop 3".
Also, he has an excellent pro-life track record, as proven in "Three Men and a Baby". Or was that Steve Guttenberg? On second thought...
posted by Dr. Zira at 9:54 PM on July 13, 2005

amberglow writes "There's one more real judge we have to worry about: John Bates from the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C"

Surely he can't be worse than "Killer" Bill Pryor. The guy's never met a minor or mentally-disabled person he didn't feel he could have executed in good conscience.

And yes, he was a recess appointment to the federal bench (as though one had to ask) because he never would have gotten the votes of even most of the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee (and Bush knew it).
posted by clevershark at 10:23 PM on July 13, 2005

In the immortal words of ParisParamus: Has Michael Moore done Hari Kari yet?
posted by mosch at 11:20 PM on July 13, 2005

callmejay: Alberto Gonzales is the odds-on favorite for the nomination. Alberto Gonzales is pro-choice.
posted by sellout at 11:47 PM on July 13, 2005

I don't see even this Republican Congress confirming someone as reactionary and controversial as Ann Coulter, not even taking into account her complete lack of qualifications.
posted by Target Practice at 12:44 AM on July 14, 2005

Creosote writes "that has delegated the choice of a replacement to their nine-year-old whose knowledge of cars comes from playing 'Carmageddon' dozens of times and blowing up plastic hot rods with firecrackers."

Bush isn't actually going to make this decision, he'll do what ever his handlers/advisors tell him to do.
posted by Mitheral at 6:18 AM on July 14, 2005

Dr. Zira : >

Bush isn't actually going to make this decision, he'll do what ever his handlers/advisors tell him to do.
Rove's on the job--no worries there, huh?
posted by amberglow at 6:26 AM on July 14, 2005

What about Cheif Justice Wapner?

I can see it now: "The Peeeople's Supreeme Cooourt!"
posted by jonmc at 6:49 AM on July 14, 2005

There will be endless babble and trumped up controversy no matter who is nominated. Remind me not to log on to MeFi when it happens. PLEASE.
posted by cpchester at 7:04 AM on July 14, 2005

Mefi wasn't the only place Justice Judy was suggested. Kurt Vonnegut is on the bandwagon!

An Ashcroft nomination wouldn't surprise me in the least.
posted by SisterHavana at 7:51 AM on July 14, 2005

Olsen. No question. Good friend of Ken Starr, lead counsel Bush v Gore, untouchable politically given his wife was on board AA77 when it hit the Pentagon on 9/11. They choose anyone else and someone's got photos of him duct-taping electrodes to Afghani nipples in Gitmo.
posted by bookie at 9:22 AM on July 14, 2005

Is there much chance that the nomine will be someone who is younger, say 50? It would seem that if you were going to try and stack the deck you'd want to stack it for as long as possible.
posted by Mitheral at 9:41 AM on July 14, 2005

callmejay: Alberto Gonzales is the odds-on favorite for the nomination. Alberto Gonzales is pro-choice.
posted by sellout at 2:47 AM EST on July 14 [!]

Dammit, sellout, quit using facts to prove me wrong.
posted by callmejay at 10:35 AM on July 14, 2005

The Crimson Chin for Justice! With a chin like he has, he'd make a great Supreme Court judge. Justice Crimson Chin. Has a nice ring to it, don't ya think?

And to agree with an earlier post, yes, I think Judge Judy would be a great choice.
posted by nlindstrom at 5:02 PM on July 14, 2005