Posted on 11/08/2004 10:29:12 AM PST by NYer
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- President Bush is reportedly considering pro-life Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for the chief justice position should the ailing William Rehnquist step down from the court.
According to a story on the Drudge Report web site, Bush has launched an internal review weighing the pros and cons of nominating Thomas to the top position on the nation's highest court.
A leading White House source told the Drudge Report that Thomas is Bush's personal favorite pick to be elevated to the Chief Justice position, but that the idea is one of several under consideration.
"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," the White House source said. "Justice Thomas simply has an extraordinary record."
One concern the Bush administration has is the potential fight over the Thomas nomination.
Moving Thomas up to the Chief Justice position would subject him to a new confirmation process in the Senate. That could expose Thomas to attacks on his record, including his pro-life views.
It could also open up the possibility of bringing back one of the most infamous names associated with Supreme Court confirmations -- Anita Hill.
According to the White House source, the Bush administration believes it is possible that Rehnquist, who is being treated for cancer, could step down from the court as early as the end of this year.
A biography of Thomas released in August indicated that he has previously been interviewed by White House attorneys as a possible chief justice candidate.
Last week, Rehnquist said he was unable to return to the Supreme Court after being hospitalized for thyroid cancer. Justice Rehnquist was treated for the disease at Bethesda Naval Hospital.
Rehnquist, who is pro-life and was one of the two dissenters in the Roe v. Wade case that allowed abortions, said he would continue working at home until doctors cleared him to return to the high court.
"According to my doctors, my plan to return to the office today was too optimistic," he said in a statement. "While at home, I am working on court matters, including opinions for cases already argued. I am, and will, continue to be in close contact with my colleagues, my law clerks, and members of the Supreme Court staff."
Related web sites:
Supreme Court - http://www.supremecourtus.gov
Why would there be anything? I mean... he's already an SC justice. There has to be an *additional* hearing for him to take a different position within the *same* court?
What's up with that?
Dan
Since both are well qualified I must ask:
Who's younger Thomas or Scalia?
Who's healthier?
Who has the strongest family history of longevity?
Whoever has the greatest chance of leading the Supremes longest has my vote.
While I think Scalia would be the best choice, the thought of Clarence Thomas is appealing, just to see the liberal heads exploding.
The Constitution states that the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate will appoint judges to the Supreme Court. Since Thomas is already on the court and has been consented to, why does he have to go through another confirmation process to be Chief Justice?
Scalia for CJ!
Folks, we're missing the great strategery here. Look..the dems won't oppose Thomas..they'd be insane to do so..it doesn't change anything on the court, and the CJ doesn't do much mroe than the other justices except assign who write the opinions.. The beauty is that because it will go through easily, with 60+ votes..it will show that there is strong support for Bush's other judicial nominations IF they could only get a floor vote
We all know that successful, conservative people of color who don't vote Democrat are traitors to their own "people." Liberals would counter that "Uncle Thomas" isn't really black.
Another possibility: The president is already going in another direction, but is releasing this story that a particular candidate is "under consideration" as a "thank you for services rendered." This is done when professional sports teams are cutting down to the "short list" to fill a coaching vacancy.
I can't imagine that Bush wants another confirmation circus involving Justice Thomas. Yet conservatives owe him a lot.
I don't think that it will be Scalia, either. Scalia would have to repeat the hearing process while another candidate for associate justice goes through his/hers. Too many chances to have liberals gum up the works.
If that is indeed the case then I change my worthlees vote to Thomas.
Actually the Senate lacks giants and backbone in general.
Isn't this like the 20th posting of this story? Did you know John Kerry was in Vietnam?
Just for information, Thomas is married to a very elegant white lady. Honestly, I don't think that has anything to do with this though. But I guess it could come up.
Dear EA, the problem is that Clarence Thomas has not a clear past and probably his appointment was passed simply because he is black. He divorced and the accusation of anita JìHilla was buried thanks to conservative and liberal black lobbies. this is the truth! I know he has been conservative in Court, but for a moral issue and also for an undeniable difference in intellectual skills, I have to prefer Antonin Scalia as the next CJ. Scalia is a genius!
fine but PLEASE no BS from anita hill
As much as I like Scalia, I believe Clarence Thomas is a better choice. He's younger and more thoughtful and will be around longer to irritate the libs.
Possible, in that case I would say Kennedy would be his ace card. Dubya's entire base would be up in arms if he picked O'Conner or any lefty, so that leaves him, Scalia and Thomas.
So, you're saying that you BELIEVED Hill's crap, 'eh, newbie?
I think Thomas gets the nod...by a hair.
I do think this is a trial balloon and that it will cause veins to pop on the left side of the political spectrum. But it is far from unthinkable.
No my dear! I'm a loyal republican, but I think that Thomas has not a good personal credentials, differently from Scalia. Besides when he was asked about Roe v. Wade case, by the Senate Committee, he said he had no idea! Clearly he has improved his position, becoming one of the most conservative J in the SC many times, but I would feel better with Scalia. It's not only a matter of interpretation...
It would prove that the left is not even close to considering working with this President. Not that we needed any additional proof, mind you, but it would give us a club ("We remember what you did at Justice Thomas' confirmation for Chief Justice!") to beat them with over the next four years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.