![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Stop! In the Name of Law!
May. 2nd, 2009 06:45 amFor those of you who haven't had the chance or inclination to keep up with the non-flu non-financial news, Supreme Court Justice Souter is stepping down.
And, instead of George "I know her heart" Bush* making the decisions, we instead have a president with a respected jurisprudence background and training, a man whose lectures and public comments reflect an awareness that a Supreme must be aware of more than simply their own narrow worldview, when considering the long-term impact of their decisions
[from the NYT: In voting against the nomination of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. as a senator, Mr. Obama said that “adherence to precedent and rules of construction and interpretation will only get you through the 25th mile of the marathon.”... what concerned him most was the last mile, one that must take account of “broader perspectives on how the world works.”]
IOW, odds are he's not going to choose an old-school Dead White Man Yalie** of any gender or color.
The betting money is that he will appoint a woman, to even out the incredibly male-dominated Court and better reflect the reality of the American population. I can't see this as a bad thing, no matter her political views...if we're to become a gender-parity state, there first needs to be an evening out of power, and like 'em or loathe 'em, the Supremes are indeed a power -- and a long-term transforming power at that.
And once Souter is replaced, Obama will still have Ginsburg and Stevens (who are both, I think, slightly to the left of Souter) to replace. [there was no way, short of death, those three were going to step down before Bush was out of office, and I think they deserve kudos from every fuzzy wuzzy liberal on earth for that!)
Let the nomination games begin....
*remember Harriet Miers?
** my dad went to Harvard, and I lived in New Haven for two years. I have a learned bias, yes. Sorry.
And, instead of George "I know her heart" Bush* making the decisions, we instead have a president with a respected jurisprudence background and training, a man whose lectures and public comments reflect an awareness that a Supreme must be aware of more than simply their own narrow worldview, when considering the long-term impact of their decisions
[from the NYT: In voting against the nomination of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. as a senator, Mr. Obama said that “adherence to precedent and rules of construction and interpretation will only get you through the 25th mile of the marathon.”... what concerned him most was the last mile, one that must take account of “broader perspectives on how the world works.”]
IOW, odds are he's not going to choose an old-school Dead White Man Yalie** of any gender or color.
The betting money is that he will appoint a woman, to even out the incredibly male-dominated Court and better reflect the reality of the American population. I can't see this as a bad thing, no matter her political views...if we're to become a gender-parity state, there first needs to be an evening out of power, and like 'em or loathe 'em, the Supremes are indeed a power -- and a long-term transforming power at that.
And once Souter is replaced, Obama will still have Ginsburg and Stevens (who are both, I think, slightly to the left of Souter) to replace. [there was no way, short of death, those three were going to step down before Bush was out of office, and I think they deserve kudos from every fuzzy wuzzy liberal on earth for that!)
Let the nomination games begin....
*remember Harriet Miers?
** my dad went to Harvard, and I lived in New Haven for two years. I have a learned bias, yes. Sorry.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
