Posted on 05/26/2012 2:08:35 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Paul Clement, who served as U.S. solicitor general under President George W. Bush and is now a lawyer in private practice, is the favorite of many conservatives. Clement argued last month for the Supreme Court to strike down Obama's 2010 healthcare law, and he is defending laws that ban same-sex marriage and that target illegal immigrants.
Clement, 45, would be "at the top of any short list right now," said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, a group that advocates for conservative nominees.
Asked about Clement, Mary Ann Glendon, a co-chairwoman of Romney's Justice Advisory Committee, voiced "unbounded admiration" for him.
"He's the type of person who fits the mold that the governor has pledged to look for," Glendon said, adding that "it's much too soon to speculate about names."
Mentioned as often as Clement is Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Kavanaugh, 47, sits on a court that produced four sitting justices. He has deep roots in Washington, D.C., having worked in the Bush White House and assisted in the 1990s investigation that nearly led to President Bill Clinton's ouster.
Kavanaugh is known for elaborate opinions such as a 65-page dissent he wrote in November exploring how an 1867 tax law barred courts from considering Obama's healthcare law until 2015.
A third possibility, Judge Diane Sykes, is often mentioned as a likely Romney nominee if the next person to leave the Supreme Court is Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court's senior woman justice. Ginsburg has survived cancer twice.
Sykes, 54, was appointed to a Chicago-based U.S. appeals court in 2004, overcoming Democratic criticism of her record in abortion-related cases.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
” Kinda getting ahead of ourselves here. He’s not even officially the nominee and now he’s making SCOTUS appointments?”
I don’t think so.
First, a disclaimer: I’m not a Romney “supporter”, I voted for Newt in my state’s primary even after it was clear he was going to drop out.
Nevertheless, I have read dozens, perhaps hundreds of posts in this forum claiming that, if elected, Romney would only nominate liberals or “middlers” to the Court.
If a President Romney nominates Mr. Clement — especially if the current Court tosses out ObamaCare — that would rate a “conservative home run” knocked right out of the ballpark.
I also recall reading, right here on FR, that the one of the advisors working with Romney on judicial appointments is none less than former solicitor general Robert Bork. Again, the gold standard of judicial conservatism. You can’t find a better consigliere than that.
So yes, I -do- think something like this warrants a close look by those who are “wary of Romney”....
“If Clement is nominated, the libs and media will say he shouldn’t serve since he argued the Obamacare case. They will claim that shows him as too partisan. Seriously - they will make that argument with a straight face.”
My answer to that:
Thurgood Marshall...
.... who, after arguing and winning Brown v. Board of Education at the Supreme Court, was nominated to fill the next vacancy there....
And then, go ahead with it.
Mitt had ample chance to appoint judges when he was a governor. Clearly, a look at those appointments should qualm any fears, right?
I'm surprised he was able to get even 9 republicans. Most were appointed to district court or clerk magistrate level where Romney was interested in appointing those who were tough on crime.
As far as the MSC, Romney appointed a conservative member of the Federalist Society, Christopher Moore, to chair the Judicial Nominating Commission. He kept the libs to a low roar.
I tried to look at a Redstate article regarding the picks but it isn't responding right now.
That would argue that Thurgood Marshall of Brown vs. Board of Education fame should never have been seated on the court. I'm up for that debate any time any place.
Thanks Clintonfatigued.
Hmm.. it's interesting that Massachusetts elected Mittens.
Mittens was the fourth republican governor in a row.
Massachusetts prefers republican governors, but the trend may have changed since Mitt, he left with 34% approval, and after weakening the state party, he also lost the governor’s seat to the democrats ever since he left.
Yes, prior to Mittens, Weld and Cellucci were elected and Swift completed Cellucci's term. All were "Michael Bloomberg" Republicans. They shrugged, wore the "Republican" label, then winked and nodded as everybody went along with the charade.
Many of us remember failed rino warrior Weld.
Romney rejected, disliked, voted against, (renounced his republican party membership) Reagan, but named William Weld as his political mentor, and the politician that he most identified with.
Romney also despised Senator Jesse Helms, quote “My hope is that, after this election, it will be the moderates of both parties who will control the Senate, not the Jesse Helms”.
For conservative political activists, this is going to be a long, strange, election year.
For those of us who are locked outside of our normal patterns yet are passionate about politics, and even belong to forums, it is going to be a nightmare.
Agreed. This election is the ultimate “lose-lose” scenario.
It is absolutely pathetic that we now have permanent "diversity" seats on the Supreme Court.
It would be, but Reid appears to be the exception. Do you know about Jeff Flake?
Either Obama or Romney will assure that the SC remains a moral and constitutional wasteland.
We’re never going to get out courts back until we put the legislative branch into the hands of legislators who will impeach any judge speedily who transgresses his own legitimate powers or the Constitution.
The appointments would last about 20 years. How long would control of the senate last ? Probably not 20 years. I’m no Mitt fan at all, but he is a much better alternative than Obama.
While it’s nice to read something like this, isn’t it just a liiiiiiiiitle premature?
I mean there is the whole “finish the nomination process, select a VP, campaign and win an election and then have an actual opening on the Court” thing that needs to happen before we actually have this conversation for real....
1. His pal Bill Ayers
2. Stalin
3. Lenin
4. Mao
5. Hillary
6. Slick Willie
7. His wife (someone's gotta have a job come Jan 20, 2013
Bryer will leave if Obama is reelected (he said so, as did Ginsburg)
that scares the S$$T out of me...not for myself, I am 75, hey can't hurt me...it's my grand children I am voting for....
If you say at home “pride” voters, think of your kids and grands...if you do not have any...thinks of the little ones that depend on “the grown ups”
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.