BUSH CONSIDERS CLARENCE THOMAS FOR CHIEF JUSTICE

Drudge Report ^ | November 6, 2004

[RWR8189]

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN NOV 07, 2004 19:02:37 ET XXXXX

BUSH CONSIDERS CLARENCE THOMAS FOR CHIEF JUSTICE

**Exclusive**

President Bush has launched an internal review of the pros and cons of nominating Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as the chief justice if ailing William Rehnquist retires, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

A top White House source familiar with Bush's thinking explains the review of Thomas as chief justice is one of several options currently under serious consideration. But Thomas is Bush's personal favorite to take the position, the source claims.

"It would not only be historic, to nominate a minority as chief justice, symbolizing the president's strong belief in hope and optimism, but it would be a sound judicial move.... Justice Thomas simply has an extraordinary record."

One concern is the amount of political capital Bush would have to spend in congress to make the move.

A chief justice must be separately nominated by Bush and confirmed by the Senate, even if the person is already sitting on the court.

The need to replace Rehnquist could arise by year's end, Bush aides now believe.

Officially, Bush advisers call any Supreme Court vacancy talk premature.

Developing...

[Hank Rearden]

Slight preference for Scalia here, based on apparent intellect, but Thomas would be dandy too.

He better not go for Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg!

[wardaddy]

Didn't Thomas nod ever so slightly at Affirmative Action a few years ago.

I would prefer Scalia.

[Melas]

Not exactly. The chief justice doesn't get to pick who writes the majority opinion if he/she isn't part of that majority. If the CJ is part of the minority, the senior justice on the majority side either writes the opinion, or picks another justice on the majority to do so.

[gopwinsin04]

Recess appointment anyone?

[Melas]

Chief Justice has no more power over a case being heard than any other justice. If 4 justices agree to hear a case, the case is heard.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

What a GREAT week! The election, Arafat, and now this. I'm going DU patrolling. Can't wait to see how shrill they are now.

BTW Did Arafat die again today?

[Hank Rearden]

Best parking spot. Right next to Associate Justice of the Month.

Handmade, gold-rimmed, non-microwaveable, Supreme Court Gift Shop coffee mug, too. And a back-door key to the john.

[Hank Rearden]

BTW Did Arafat die again today?

Last I heard, he's not dead again.

[eno_]

Scalia is too authoritarian. Thomas may not be as mucvh the Giangantic Legal Mind, but respect for the Constitution is more important than intellectual fireworks.

Justice Thomas is also "misunderestimated." He may not have garnered the adulation Scalia has, but Thomas has the balls to take on the New Deal. To me, that's worth all the fine words of the other justices put together.

[SnakeGuy]

I recommend you read Scalias book, "A Matter of Interpretation." Scalia may be an idealogue, but his ideology is one of strict interpretation. Not one of legislating his own views from the bench. Scalia would be my choice, if he is in good health.

[commish]

I would love to see Bush give the real racists (IE Dems) a huge one-two punch when Rehnquist retires. Nominate Thomas as Chief Justice, and follow that by Nominating Janice Rogers Brown to take the associate Justice seat.

The when Stevens, O'Connor or Ginsburg has to leave - follow the 1-2 up with Garza or Estrada.

[Jack Deth]

Drudge Tease Or Not: Woohoo!!!

Go for it, "W"!


Jack.

[wardaddy]

Actually...it was not a nod at AA.

It was his declaration that lighting a cross could be singled out as a specific hate crime because it was "special"....layman's explanation.
....which was race-based in effect.....something I oppose.

...not that I am big on cross lighting but if some weirdos wish to light one on their farm it's their business to me....like Burning Man or whatever.

First time I recall seeing Thomas's bias cloud his perspective as a constructionist.

[onyx]

HA! You're on a roll. :)

[We Happy Few]

"It doesn't disqualify him. Neither Earl Warren nor Thurgood Marshall were judges."

That's true, but Warren was a governor and Marshall was Solicitor General. I don't understand why Bush didn't make Estrada an assistant AG. (Maybe Estrada wasn't interested.)

[eno_]

No one on the court holds a candle beside Scalia. The court is about the Constitution. Someone taking a plain reading of it, and not using is as a mat for mental gymnastics is much more valuable. Thomas for Chief.