Battle over Supreme Court nominees looms - (Scalia should be NUMBER ONE choice! - smart!)

WASHINGTON TIMES.COM ^ | MAY 24, 2005 | TOD LINDBERG

[CHARLITE]

If the White House has seemed a bit adrift on domestic matters, my guess is that's because they know something you don't know: The entire domestic debate is about to be taken up by a battle royale over two Supreme Court nominations. Social Security may not be going anywhere, but it makes little sense to try to introduce another major initiative when in a few weeks' time we are likely to have the mother of all partisan confrontations. The likely first move is the announcement that William Rehnquist is stepping down, opening up the job of chief justice of the United States for only the 17th time in the nation's history.

Who, then, is in line to replace him?

Now, if I were the Bush administration, I'd look for a new chief on the current court. And since Antonin Scalia is universally regarded as a brilliant jurist, agree with him or disagree, and since my party base happens to love him, I'd look no farther. What happens then? Well, that's a good question. If I were advising Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, I'd recommend letting the Scalia confirmation go through fairly easily. My reasoning would be that Justice Scalia is on the court already, his elevation does nothing to alter the voting pattern, and the real action ought to be directed toward the nominee who will fill Justice Scalia's associate seat once he gets the big chair. One could take the opportunity to look reasonable. But I bet there are a lot of people advising Mr. Reid that Justice Scalia Must Be Stopped. It's sort of the principle of the thing: He is, after all, "evil Nino," in the charming characterization of one of the late Justice Blackmun's left-wing clerks.

[Ramius]

Actually... there's an interesting question. I'm not sure that the Senate gets to be involved on the promotion of a sitting justice to C.J. Is that actually the case?

[tlb]

People need to take a deep breath. The hysteria I'm seeing in some of the nuclear option threads is absurd.

The republicans do not take the rap for "changing the rules", and still move the ball forward. Touchdowns are rarely one long run from across the field. They usually come from a series of short gains.

The logjam is broken. After three years of Ted Kennedy blocking any conservative nominee as a modern day Atilla, the dems now publicly shrug and say no big deal.

If even one of these "unacceptable" judges now are non-objectionable, how can similar Supreme Court nominees be ? And if they are unreasonably filibustered, the onus falls on the dems for breaking the spirit of the deal. I'm not saying that isn't likely to happen but it will be an easier sell for the republican leadership if breaking this deal can be laid at the dems feet.

The senate would have to approve Scalia's elevation to CJ. Before they surely would have blocked him. Now really how can they ?

[truth_seeker]

"I'm not sure that the Senate gets to be involved on the promotion of a sitting justice to C.J. Is that actually the case?"

They do.

[RWR8189]

Scalia deserves to be Chief Justice, but he is getting old.

Thomas should be elevated because he could leave his mark on the court for the next 20-30 years.

[BigFinn]

Maybe off the subject for a second, but I was just reading that Sun Myung Moon (remember the Moonies?) owns and publishes the Washington Times. Is this really true? Anybody have any info to substantiate this?

[kayak]

I had not realized Scalia's age until I looked it up after reading your post. He was born in March 1936 which makes him 69 (if my math is correct). I would never have guessed that ... he certainly doesn't look it.

[ambrose]

Excellent points.

As for Scalia... he recently turned 69. I'd like to see someone younger as CJ. Clarence Thomas... or perhaps Janice Brown.

[Talking_Mouse]

Yes it is true.

[kpp_kpp]

sorry for my ignorance... can some one tell me what advantage being "chief" justice is on the SC?

[JCEccles]

or perhaps Janice Brown.

LOL! Wouldn't that annoy the democrats? I'd love to see it.

[Talking_Mouse]

No, let this one go to Scalia - no one can argue he is not a brilliant constitutional scholar.

I would like Justice Brown to be his replacement on the SC. That is going to be the place where we will end up fighting the filibuster.

[Talking_Mouse]

sorry for my ignorance... can some one tell me what advantage being "chief" justice is on the SC?

You get to bang the gavel at the start and end of the court, assign who writes the majority opinion when your side is in the majority, if the POTUS is impeached you preside over the trial, the court period is named after you (the kpp_kpp court) and you can put stripes on your robes; beside these advantages you are just one of nine votes.

[Yosemitest]

NOT ONE PENNY!!!

I'm angry enough to pledge money to real conservatives who will run against these RINO's and replace them. How about $100.00 a head?

I encourage everyone to attack!

Lincoln D. Chafee of Rhode Island
Office Locations

United States Senate
141A Russell
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-2921

170 Westminster Street
Suite 1100
Providence, RI 02903
(401) 453-5294

320 Thames Street
Room 272
Newport, RI 02840
(401) 845-0700

Susan M. Collins of Maine
Senator Susan M. Collins
172 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Phone:


Washington, D.C. Office (202) 224-2523

Augusta Office (207) 622-8414
Bangor Office (207) 945-0417
Biddeford Office (207) 283-1101
Caribou Office (207) 493-7873
Lewiston Office (207) 784-6969
Portland Office (207) 780-3575


Olympia J. Snowe of Maine
Senator Olympia J. Snowe
154 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
(202) 224-5344

John W. Warner of Virginia
Contacts for all offices Washington Office Address:

225 Russell Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Telephone:
(202) 224-2023
(202) 224-6295 FAX

Office Hours: Monday-Friday 9:00a.m. to 6:00p.m.


John McCain of Arizona
contacts
241 Russell Senate Ofc. Bldg.
United States Senate
, Washington DC 20510

Phone: (202) 224-2235
Fax: (202) 228-2862

Phoenix
5353 North 16th Street
Suite 105
Phoenix, Arizona 85016

Phone: (602) 952-2410
Fax: (602) 952-8702

Tempe
4703 S. Lakeshore Drive
Suite 1
Tempe, Arizona 85282

Phone: (480) 897-6289
Fax: (480) 897-8389

Tucson
407 W. Congress Street
Suite 103
Tucson, Arizona 85701

Phone: (520) 670-6334
Fax: (520) 670-6637

Lindsey O. Graham of South Carolina
contacts for all offices
Washington Office
290 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-5972 phone

Upstate Regional Office
101 East Washington Street, Suite 220
Greenville, South Carolina 29601
(864) 250-1417

Midlands Regional Office
508 Hampton Street, Suite 202
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
(803) 933-0112 phone

Pee Dee Regional Office
McMillan Federal Building
401 West Evans Street, Suite 226B
Florence, South Carolina 29501
(843) 669-1505 phone

Lowcountry Regional Office
530 Johnnie Dodds Boulevard, Suite 202
Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina 29464
(843) 849-3887 phone


Piedmont Regional Office
140 East Main Street, Suite 110
Rock Hill, South Carolina 29730
(803) 366-2828 phone

Golden Corner Regional Office (part-time)b 135 Eagles Nest Drive, Suite B
Seneca, South Carolina 29678
(864) 888-3330

Senator Mike DeWine, an Ohio Republican
contact for all offices
Washington, D.C. Office
140 Russell Senate Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-2315
Fax: (202) 224-6519
TDD: (202) 224-9921

[JLS]

Exactly, I just looked it up. Scalia was born in 1936 and Thomas was born in 1948. In addition putting Thomas up would put the Dims in the position of wanting to block the first African-American Chief Justice. Of course putting up Owens would put the Dims in the position of blocking the first female Chief Justice. And of corse Johnson would combine the prior two. Nice little pickle for the Dims maybe.

[kpp_kpp]

that is kind of what i thought.

i don't know what the big deal is then. let kennedy be CJ to throw them a bone and fill the rest of the court with constitutionalists.

[CHARLITE]

"The senate would have to approve Scalia's elevation to CJ. Before they surely would have blocked him. Now really how can they?"

That's why I don't think that all of this irate hand-wringing about the perceived Republican "sell out" is all that valid.......or necessary. If the Democrats try to put the country (and the Republican party leaders) through yet another long drama, when the president nominates his choice for Chief Justice, then there will be nothing left of their credibility, slim as it already is.

The American public aren't fools. They know what has been going on, and they really aren't going to be patient with months more of Democrats having temper tantrums over the CJ choice, so in that way, I don't think that the 7 Dems and 7 Republicans came to a bad compromise at all. We're holding better cards than they are!

Char :)

[Dat Mon]

This is a no brainer IMO...you go with the best minds who are also bonefide solid values conservatives. People who will shape the court over the next ten years....by force of intellect...and ideas.

Scalia for Chief Justice...the mans legal mind is unsurpassed.

Estrada to replace him. Estrada could do some serious damage to the entrenched cultural powers that be. He certainly appears to be brilliant, and could benefit tremendously from mentoring by Scalia. A future Chief Justice.

[CHARLITE]

"Estrada to replace him."

Now you're talking! What a perfect plan! Email President Bush immediately. Offer your "advice and consent" on these choices!.........and don't forget to add that there are a powerful number of FReepers solidly behind that "double whammy!"

If that ever became a reality (Scalia as CJ and Estrada replacing Scalia), the whole Democrat leadership would turn into pumpkins at midnight of the day the nominees were confirmed! Doncha love it? Great poetic justice, IMO!

Thanks, Dat Mon!

Char :)

[Lazamataz]

*What* battle???!???

Republicans will give in.

Republicans will roll over.

Republicans will expose their neck to the 'Alpha' dominant Democrat Dog.