Replies

Yep. Estrada's Kagan endorsement should be enough to keep him off the short list of potential SCOTUS nominees of any future GOP president. At the time that the Dems had borked him into oblivion, most of us were rightfully devastated that politics stopped this guy with an inspiring life story from getting a post he rightfully deserved. But looking back now with his support of Kagan, it made have been for the best and Estrada could have morphed into another go-along, get-along GOP judge who "evolves" in office when surrounded by liberals.

That's the problem with Presidential judicial appointments. They're like Forest Gump's box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get.

Presidents who are normally solid conservatives have given us several useless duds, like Edward Douglass White (Taft appointee), Harlan F. Stone (Coolidge appointee, who morphed into a liberal and was then named CJ by FDR), and Sandra Day O'Connor (Reagan, I won't even mention Anthony Kennedy because he usually votes the "right way" and Reagan's hand was forced on that one)

By contrast, squishy centrist Eisenhower appointed John Marshall Harlan II (the "great dissenter" of the Warren Court), squishy moderate George H. Bush gave us rock solid Clarance Thomas, and ultra liberal "progressive" Democrat Woodrow Wilson put hardcore conservative James Clark McReynolds on the court, who went on to vehemently oppose most of FDR' New Deal agenda. (how's that for a Democrat President accidentally appointing someone good?)

Lincoln's justices were generally much more conservative than him, and Salmon P. Chase struck down the constitutionality of paper money after helping enact it in the first place when he was Lincoln's Treasury secretary (a present day parallel would be if Kagan votes with the conservative justices to kill Obamacare... doubt it would ever happen, but you never know)

George Washington, who is a legendary President and a larger than life figure, appointed forgettable and short-lived Chief Justices whose service on the court are footnotes in history. By contrast, 1 termer John Adams, whose time as President is forgettable and far outshadowed by the man who defeated him (Jefferson), gave us John Marshall as CJ, perhaps the most well known and larger than life CJ to ever sit on the court.

So I don't believe Romney is inherently conservative or any any conservative principals he'd stick to no matter what, but I don't discount the chance he'd give us a great conservative justice (I don't discount the chance he'd give us a John Paul Stevens type disaster, either). But I'd feel the same way if we had a reliably "conservative" President in office like Rick Perry or Fred Thompson. Their advisers might talk them into nominating some closet liberal douchebag they swear is a "10th amendment states rights originalist federalist society guy" Someone on this thread who is staunchly anti-Romney did make a valid point, would anyone in their wildest dreams have ever guessed in 2000 that Bush would nominate Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court? It sounded like a bad joke when he announced the nomination, and still does long after the choice was withdrawn.

Until voters are allowed to vote SCOTUS judges out of office, you just have to cross your fingers and hope for the best.