What would Obama’s Supreme Court look like?

**Zeus** · 10-10-2012, 11:59 AM

What would Obama’s Supreme Court look like?
By Liz Goodwin, Yahoo! News| The Ticket

President Barack Obama has already appointed two new justices to the Court and, if he's reelected, he'll most likely get at least one more crack at it. There are currently four justices in their seventies on the aging Supreme Court, and three of them are within four years of 79, the average age at which justices have retired since 1970.

As we wrote last week, Romney would be in a better position to drastically reshape the court if he is elected, because the oldest justice right now is the liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 79. Romney would choose a conservative-leaning justice to replace her, shifting the makeup of the court so that conservatives have six votes and liberals just three. Ginsburg has hinted she will step down when she's 82, which would be during the next presidential term.

If Ginsburg retires, Obama will almost certainly replace her with another liberal justice and the court will remain split between four reliably liberal justices and four even more reliably conservative justices, with Justice Anthony Kennedy swinging between them, but more often siding with conservatives. Obama's earlier two Supreme Court appointments kept the status quo: He replaced two retiring liberal justices with people of a similar ideological bent, leaving the balance of the court unchanged.

But two of Ginsburg's conservative colleagues are not far behind her in age, which means it's possible that Obama would be in a position to replace Antonin Scalia or Anthony Kennedy, both 76. (Stephen Breyer, a liberal on the court, is 74.)
If Obama is able to replace Kennedy, a moderate conservative, or the very conservative Scalia, the court's ideological make up would change dramatically.
A left-leaning court could alter laws on same-sex marriage, gun rights, affirmative action, campaign finance, property and a whole host of other legal issues we might not even know about yet.

And such a move would have major consequences. Geoffrey Stone, the former dean of the University of Chicago Law School, found that if a liberal judge had replaced one of the four most conservative judges starting in 2002, the liberal wing of the court would have won 17 out of the 18 most important Supreme Court cases over the past ten years, including Citizens United, which struck down campaign finance reform laws. Meanwhile, if a conservative judge had replaced one of the liberals, the conservative wing would have won 16 out of the 18 cases, including the health care reform case.

Another extremely important reason Obama needs to be sent packing .

**m00** · 10-10-2012, 12:05 PM

Romney would choose a conservative-leaning justice to replace her, shifting the makeup of the court so that conservatives have six votes and liberals just three

I hope not. I hope (and actually believe) that Romney would choose a thoughtful constitutionalist that understands technology and tries to apply the intentions and philosophical logic of the constitution to modern times. And not just like "oh he'll vote party lines."

**Ranger Rick** · 10-10-2012, 01:15 PM

Which brings us to the Senate. Ried will never allow a constitutionalist, and any Conservative is sure to be played with.

**NJCardFan** · 10-10-2012, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by m00

Romney would choose a conservative-leaning justice to replace her, shifting the makeup of the court so that conservatives have six votes and liberals just three

I hope not. I hope (and actually believe) that Romney would choose a thoughtful constitutionalist that understands technology and tries to apply the intentions and philosophical logic of the constitution to modern times. And not just like "oh he'll vote party lines."

In my lifetime, the justices appointed by Republican presidents are not ideologues. Conservative, yes but not ideologues like Ginsberg, Sotomayor, and Kegan. Trouble is, it seems that only GOP appointees go against the grain. Kennedy in the Kelo decision and Roberts in the Obamacare decision. If Romney is elected, I'd like to see him appoint more along the lines of Thomas or Alito.

**Novaheart** · 10-10-2012, 01:49 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Anyone who believes that a Supreme Court justice is going to be predictable along political lines hasn't been paying attention. In particular, if you think that they will be "conservative (and if by that you mean a simple read of the Constitution)", then you are also mistaken.

These people are at the height of the practice of law- they aspire to be remembered as great legal minds. Great legal minds cannot be established by simply rubber stamping old ideas or interpretations. To be great legal minds, they have to make new law or find existing laws applicable to new situations in new ways. You may not like it when they disagree with you, but it is the case.

As always, the justices are great minds when they agree with us and morons when they don't.

Now there is possibly an exception to this rule. Scalia appears to be going out of his way to test the limits of the appearance of professional objectivity.

**Novaheart** · 10-10-2012, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by NJCardFan

In my lifetime, the justices appointed by Republican presidents are not ideologues. Conservative, yes but not ideologues like Ginsberg, Sotomayor, and Kegan. Trouble is, it seems that only GOP appointees go against the grain. Kennedy in the Kelo decision and Roberts in the Obamacare decision. If Romney is elected, I'd like to see him appoint more along the lines of Thomas or Alito.

How do you feel about DUI checkpoints and warrantless stops and searches at interior "border" checkpoints fifty miles from any international border?

**txradioguy** · 10-10-2012, 01:59 PM

He'll have at least two picks if (God forbid) he's re-elected.

My prediction...Holder will take one spot...Kamala Brown will take the other.

That will allow Brown's brother in law Tony West to become the next AG.

And that...would be enough to make Justice drop her scales and weep.

**Novaheart** · 10-10-2012, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by txradioguy

He'll have at least two picks if (God forbid) he's re-elected.

My prediction...Holder will take one spot...Kamala Brown will take the other.

That will allow Brown's brother in law Tony West to become the next AG.

And that...would be enough to make Justice drop her scales and weep.

Kamala Brown or Kamala Harris? Harris would be a terrible choice.

**txradioguy** · 10-10-2012, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Novaheart

Kamala Brown or Kamala Harris? Harris would be a terrible choice.

Harris I'm sorry...the California AG. I've been mixing names tonite. Second thread I've done that.

She's on Obama's short list. Probably helps she was a big time bundler for his 2008 campaign.

**Novaheart** · 10-10-2012, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by txradioguy

Harris I'm sorry...the California AG. I've been mixing names tonite. Second thread I've done that.

She's on Obama's short list. Probably helps she was a big time bundler for his 2008 campaign.

Kamala Harris is reportedly a brilliant woman, I don't see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-G1VGJBWcU