Date: 2016-02-14 01:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bruce munro (from livejournal.com)
No, Michael Moore. :)

Date: 2016-02-14 01:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dewline.livejournal.com
I suppose either Mrs. Knowles-Carter or Mr. Moore would be sufficient to trigger more than a few cerebral hemorrhages.

Date: 2016-02-14 02:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] graydon saunders (from livejournal.com)
Sixty-something white guy, no?

You want someone in their forties or fifties, traditionally, so they can have a lasting influence. You totally don't want to appoint any men until there are at least five women on the court.

I'm sure Obama can think of a learned black woman or six with a prestigious law degree and no older than mid-forties, but I can also imagine wanting to gift the Republicans with an opportunity for election year PR suicide.

Date: 2016-02-14 02:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bruce munro (from livejournal.com)
True, but we're talking cerebral hemorrhages here, not practicality. :)

Date: 2016-02-14 12:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] graydon saunders (from livejournal.com)
Part of what drives the cerebral hemorrhage is the sense that it could be for serious.

If it absolutely has to be a man, how about Ta-nehisi Coates? Eloquent, seriously concerned for justice, willing to think hard about the issues; what's not to like?

Date: 2016-02-14 06:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sean o'hara (from livejournal.com)
He has no judicial experience or even a law degree, which makes him even less experienced than Harriet Meiers, whose nomination was laughed out of the Senate by Republicans and Democrats alike. Coates would have no chance at confirmation, and rightly so because appointing someone solely for their views and not experience is precisely what the confirmation process is supposed to stop.

Right now the smart money seems to be pooling on Sri Srinivasan -- he's a moderate who was approved to the DC Circuit by unanimous vote, making it likely that the more principled Republicans in the Senate would break with the hardliners on the issue.

Date: 2016-02-14 08:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] graydon saunders (from livejournal.com)
If there's a serious chance of getting someone passed, absolutely.

If the republicans wouldn't pass Moses returned in glory and Harvard Law tenure, it might be time to go a bit political on them.

Date: 2016-02-14 08:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] w. dow rieder (from livejournal.com)
The best way to get political about it is to put forward a choice that, if rejected, makes it very clear that they are refusing to do their job as senators--then draw attention to this during the campaign. There are Senate elections this fall, too.

Date: 2016-02-15 05:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nathan helfinstine (from livejournal.com)
The fact that Sri was approved unanimously is a political point. Republican senators could expect their next re-election campaigns to feature accusations of flip-flopping for voting to approve the guy in 2013 and then shit-talking him in 2016.

Date: 2016-02-15 06:18 am (UTC)
goljerp: Photo of the moon Callisto (Default)
From: [personal profile] goljerp
Also, Sri Srinivasan would add some diversity to the Supreme Court -- he is from India (moved to the US as a young child) so would be first Indian-American on the court. His law degree is not from Harvard or Yale -- which is probably a plus as well.

making it likely that the more principled Republicans in the Senate would break with the hardliners on the issue.

I'm not holding my breath on that, though...

Date: 2016-02-14 04:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stevendj.livejournal.com
I'd consider appointing a reasonable moderate in their sixties, and getting them confirmed, a big win. Having a functional Supreme Court with five votes for "not crazy" would be a huge improvement over the last couple of decades.

I think it's very likely that the Democrats will win the next 2-3 presidential elections, which means we'll get more chances to replace arch-conservatives, against what will probably be less strident opposition. And if President Warren in 2027 gets to replace Obama appointee Moderate McOldiepants, well, I'll be pretty content with that outcome.

Date: 2019-12-01 08:58 am (UTC)
dbdatvic: deep inside the Mandelbot set (Default)
From: [personal profile] dbdatvic
> I think it's very likely that the Democrats will win the next 2-3 presidential elections

Phonecall from 2019: we are in the most surreal timeline.

--Dave, swirliest ever, people are saying

Date: 2016-02-14 01:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anton-p-nym.livejournal.com
I saw at least one semi-serious proposal that Pres. Obama appoint Anita Hill...

-- Steve thinks that'd trigger a few TIAs.

Date: 2016-02-14 04:58 pm (UTC)
ext_6418: (Default)
From: [identity profile] elusis.livejournal.com
Oh, that's good.

Except that forcing a woman to work with her harasser is kind of not so awesome.

Date: 2016-02-15 04:01 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anton-p-nym.livejournal.com
Ooh, quite; forgot he's still on the bench.

-- Steve felt it was from another era, and kinda almost is.

Date: 2016-02-15 05:56 am (UTC)
ext_6418: (Default)
From: [identity profile] elusis.livejournal.com
Oh it's all just so tawdry.

Profile

james_davis_nicoll: (Default)
james_davis_nicoll

May 2025

S M T W T F S
     1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 910
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 31st, 2025 06:33 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios