Roberts for Chief Justice
<<--See also: The President selects a nominee.
President Bush made a push to have John Roberts confirmed as the next Chief Justice of the United States. This effectively withdraws his nomination for Justice O’Connor’s seat in favor of Chief Justice Rehnquist’s. I am not a happy camper on this. I firmly believe that the CJ needs to be elevated from an Associate Justice. Just as I believe that an Associate Justice should have experience being a judge (technically, anyone can be a justice.) Who would I have picked? Scalia. He has been a real leader amongst the conservative bloc of the high court and I believe that he would keep many of Rehnquist’s policies and procedures regarding the workings of the court. Despite that cases seem to take forever to get through, Rehnquist is known for making the process more efficient. Scalia’s elevation (by itself) to Chief Justice wouldn’t have changed the makeup of the court. It would have been replacing one conservative with another.
So now, Bush has two seats to fill. Rehnquist which John Roberts is after and O’Connor who needs a new successor to be nominated. Roberts, I think is another O’Connor. A conservative moderate. In order to maintain the status quo, the President will have to make sure that a hard liner is confirmed. The current strategy may work because Roberts is turning out to be pretty popular. His confirmation was pretty much in the bag and it may be hard for the Democrats to tar and feather him for the CJ position. While they are concentrating on Roberts, the Bush guys can sneak in a hardliner for the O’Connor seat.
In the best case scenario (depending on your political views), the Supreme Court will solidify a conservative grip. The Rehnquist vote will remain conservative. The O’Connor vote, instead of swinging, will fall inline with the conservative side. And I don’t like it for this reason. I am a conservative when it comes to most issues except social issues. I’m not a social conservative and social issues were what caused O’Connor to swing and side with the liberals. So, in general, I got a court that was conservative in cases where I thought it appropriate and liberal where I thought it appropriate. Now I worry that that delicate balance may be shifted for a long time to come.
President Bush made a push to have John Roberts confirmed as the next Chief Justice of the United States. This effectively withdraws his nomination for Justice O’Connor’s seat in favor of Chief Justice Rehnquist’s. I am not a happy camper on this. I firmly believe that the CJ needs to be elevated from an Associate Justice. Just as I believe that an Associate Justice should have experience being a judge (technically, anyone can be a justice.) Who would I have picked? Scalia. He has been a real leader amongst the conservative bloc of the high court and I believe that he would keep many of Rehnquist’s policies and procedures regarding the workings of the court. Despite that cases seem to take forever to get through, Rehnquist is known for making the process more efficient. Scalia’s elevation (by itself) to Chief Justice wouldn’t have changed the makeup of the court. It would have been replacing one conservative with another.
So now, Bush has two seats to fill. Rehnquist which John Roberts is after and O’Connor who needs a new successor to be nominated. Roberts, I think is another O’Connor. A conservative moderate. In order to maintain the status quo, the President will have to make sure that a hard liner is confirmed. The current strategy may work because Roberts is turning out to be pretty popular. His confirmation was pretty much in the bag and it may be hard for the Democrats to tar and feather him for the CJ position. While they are concentrating on Roberts, the Bush guys can sneak in a hardliner for the O’Connor seat.
In the best case scenario (depending on your political views), the Supreme Court will solidify a conservative grip. The Rehnquist vote will remain conservative. The O’Connor vote, instead of swinging, will fall inline with the conservative side. And I don’t like it for this reason. I am a conservative when it comes to most issues except social issues. I’m not a social conservative and social issues were what caused O’Connor to swing and side with the liberals. So, in general, I got a court that was conservative in cases where I thought it appropriate and liberal where I thought it appropriate. Now I worry that that delicate balance may be shifted for a long time to come.
Comments