As anyone reading this blog is already aware from Petr’s post, Antonin Scalia had died. Now we need to think about a replacement.
In the comments on that post, Lrphillips made a suggestion that really got me thinking: pick a sitting US Senator so GOP Senators will still vote for the nominee.
Great idea! I suggest Elizabeth Warren. A certain number of old-school GOP Senators would vote for her just for the sake of the Senate’s norms of collegiality. That practical consideration, all by itself, would be a solid reason to pick her. But going beyond that, she gets it.
Elizabeth Warren is the second most liberal member of the Senate, judging by both her rhetoric and her voting record. This places her substantially to the left of anyone else who might have a realistic chance of being confirmed. The problem with the typical Supreme Court justice is that the resume we generally expect of them is a very upper class resume. You have to go to an Ivy League law school, clerk for a federal judge or work for an elite law firm, then become a judge or a professor and move up the ranks that way to even have a chance. Seven out of the nine current Justices have held at least two of those four jobs, and all nine had held at least one before reaching SCOTUS. As a former Harvard Law professor, Senator Warren has the elite resume we demand of Justices, despite coming from a much more modest background on the ragged edge of the middle class. In a lot of ways, she would be a similar nominee to Sonia Sotomayor. She understands the law in terms of how it actually affects people, not in the clueless, abstract way that the more privileged Justices do.
I love Elizabeth Warren……..but I think it should be someone younger. A long term appointee would probably be better in the long run. I don’t know much about him, but I am hearing a lot about Sri Srinivasan.
There is a logical nominee from Mass.—but it isn’t Senator Warren.
Troll Bait!
I don’t think he qualifies under either of the criteria I set out.
He is simultaneously more conservative than Sen. Warren (especially on criminal justice issues) and less likely to be confirmed, because he’s a liberal without the advantage of being a sitting Senator.
but but not your criteria, or, ultimately, your provocative premise.
Patrick strikes me as just the sort of nominee that would appeal to Obama, in part because he is more conservative than Warren.
Such as?
They’re dead, of course.
… stupid idea.
The whole notion of nomination for the sake of what ‘the other guy’ thinks (though it pervade the entire Democratic noosphere… even here on BMG) is a fantastically ridiculous method of choosing. It requires mind-reading and prophecy in equal measure, two endeavors that humans are manifestly ill-equipped to undertake… and Democrats are even less capable in this than normal humans.
The notion that we have to bow to what we perceive the Senate to be most disposed to is one that ill -serves democracy and is unlikely to produce so much as a coherent outcome, much less the one we might want. Those are, in fact and deed, vastly impractical considerations. Too many people complicate politics by thinking it just means outguessing the other guy.
I think it would be a waste.
There are many legal minds who could cast a Constitutionally sound vote, backed by solid case law on the issue before the Supreme Court.
I think there are very few (one? two? five?) people who can bring to America the case that the economy is rigged and that the middle class is dying because of it. Warren is one of them.
She is more valuable to our country in the United States Senate. Elizabeth Warren is nigh-impossible to replace there.
He got way more down for working Americans in his nearly 50 years in the Senate than he ever would’ve as a president or Justice. I feel just as strongly about our current senior senator as I felt about her predecessor. Let her have a long and generational defining career in the Senate and be the next liberal lion. The presidency, Vice Presidency, the court, and certainly any cabinet post are beneath her particular set of skills.
For about 40 of those 50 years.
Warren won’t until at least 2022, after redistricting. Senator is better than nothing, but being the deciding vote on SCOTUS is way more powerful.
Five went to Harvard Law, three went to Yale Law, and one went to Columbia Law. Are you sure Ms. Rutgers Law would fit in there?
There are many fine public law schools that would produce justices of the highest caliber. Hell, even getting a BC or BU Law grad on the court would be a bit of a coup.
In my view, Elizabeth Warren is fine just where she is.
I hope that Barack Obama nominates a young liberal judicial star. I think that the right Supreme Court nominee provides an excellent focus for the rest of the campaign season. I think it reminds everybody what is at stake in this election, and I think it reminds every voter of where the parties stand on issues that matter.
There are exactly two Democrats running for the Senate seat in CA. One is a progressive (Harris) and one is not(Sanchez). Any replacement would have to announce in the next 11 days to get on the ballot.
So unless Harris can be confirmed in 11 days, nominating her throws the already ongoing CA-Sen race to either a Republican or a quasi-Republican.
he’s young, liberal, out of office. And he’s a skilled politician. Just what we need on the high court.
Why? For the same reason President Eisenhower named California Governor Earl Warren — one of the greatest Justices of the twentieth century. Even though he later said it was the most stupid decision he made when Warren turned out to be a closet liberal leading the Court to a unanimous decision in the Brown. v. Board of Education decision.
I say we should draft Governor Patrick for the job ! Come on, Mr. President. You know it’s the right thing to do. Just do it !
Fred Rich LaRiccia
So I wouldn’t call him a liberal in any meaningful sense. Most judges in Massachusetts are to his left.
… the beauty and the terror of the court. It’s not about what you were, or even are… but about what you can be. That’s exactly why most judges are to his (purported) left. It’s axiomatic if you take the time to think about it.
There is a freedom to the court that exists in few other places in the US political ecosystem. That doesn’t mean Deval Patrick is the best choice. It just means we actually can’t judge Patricks possible judicial actions on his political decisions.
Two words: Earl Warren
Two more words: David Souter.
Maybe the Rolling Stones should be singing to Obama and his wannabe successors: you can’t (don’t) always get what you want.
It doesn’t pay well as Bain and shilling for casinos and the Olympics.
How can ANYONE presume to know what any man or woman would do if they got a call from the President of the United States asking them to serve on the highest Court in the land ?
We DO know that Justice Sonya Sotomayor was so overcome with emotion that she broke down in tears.
To arrogantly declare that Governor Patrick would refuse the nomination for financial considerations is cynical and ignorant.
Fred Rich LaRiccia
We can agreeably disagree on this one Fred. I was pretty disappointed to see him become a lobbyist for a lot of regressive corporations like Bain and entities like Boston 2024. I think if we want a confirmable, reliable progressive we can do significantly better. Not to mention his mismanagement of the DCF, Connector and MBTA failures would rightly come back to haunt him.
That’s just my opinion. I say this is someone who was a true believer who canvassed for him in the summer of 2005 when no one knew who he was. Someone who met him on several occasions during that campaign and was convinced he was the real deal. The areas where Obama has disappointed me where areas where I expected it, but Patrick genuinely surprised me with some of his bad moves and flip flops.
… every last justice who ever sat the bench could have been compensated much more elsewhere, but they didn’t
Maybe because it’s prohibited. Could Obama nominate Barack Obama? He’s a Constitutional scholar, he’s relatively young, and as much as I think he didn’t fight hard enough as President, he wouldn’t have to fight on the Court. President Biden could run the country until the new Pres took office.
Just for McConnell’s reaction. He’d probably rather put him on the Court than the ticket.
Cruz would make Thomas look like Earl Warren. He probably thinks Marbury v Madison was a needless judicial overreach.