home

List of Consensus Nominees

By Jeralyn, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Thu Sep 29, 2005 at 12:43:31 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

People for the American Way provides this list of consensus nominees for the replacement of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor:

There are a number of distinguished judges first appointed to the federal bench by Republican presidents who would, like Sandra Day O’Connor, likely receive overwhelming bipartisan support to replace her. Among them are Ann Williams of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Sonia Sotomayor of the 2nd Circuit, Jose Cabranes of the 2nd Circuit and Edward Prado of the 5th Circuit. President Bush would serve the country well by choosing a consensus nominee rather than an ideologue who would move the Court substantially to the right.

My pick: Ed Prado.

< ACLU Wins Release of Abu Ghraib Abuse Photos | DeLay's Indictment: The Perfect Storm? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    List of Consensus Nominees | 16 comments (16 topical)
    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#1)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:29 PM EST
    What constitutes a "consensus"? 78-22 certainly seems like there was some bi-partisan support. Does that make it a consesus or does it have to be 100-0? BTW, I noticed when Kerry's name was called there was no response. Did he miss another vote?

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#2)
    by peacrevol on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:29 PM EST
    BTW, I noticed when Kerry's name was called there was no response. Did he miss another vote?
    No No Pat, he answered but nobody was listening.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#3)
    by mpower1952 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:29 PM EST
    I think it's obvious by now that Bush will pick whoever the hell he wants. Think of your worst nightmare candidate and that'll be his choice. Why? Because he's probably mad as hell that he had to miss his bedtime and bike rides to put on a show that he really works. Hell hath no fury like a 5 year old who missed his nap and play time. Sure do hope I'm wrong.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#4)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:29 PM EST
    Not sure, but this looks like a place to bet on the winner. Prado is at the bottom. Never saw anything like it before. I was trying to find out who voted against Roberts and came up with this. Funny, the things that can emerge from a google search

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:29 PM EST
    Let me make it simple for you: You want SCOTUS nominees you agree with? Start winning elections.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#6)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:29 PM EST
    I hear that the announcement on the next nominee has been put off till next week. If so, this would imply that Bush is looking to line up as much support as possible for a nominee who is just barely confirmable, possibly including breaking thru a filibuster. If it were a likely-easy confirmation, there'd be no reason to delay. Given Reid's recent note, wherein he cut down the list of don't-you-dares to just a few, this further implies a filibuster-inducing candidate, such as JRB, is at the top of the list for now. Remember, tho, that I said, "implies." As to what actually happens, hell, who knows for sure?

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#7)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    Let me make it simple for you: You want SCOTUS nominees you agree with? Start winning elections.
    I bet Jack Handy would be proud of that deep thought.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#8)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    Oh, also, if you're going to make "winning elections" the sole standard of truth, can we get some secure voting machines by next November? Thanks. Unless, of course, you're scared. ;)

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    JR: Having read many of your posts on many many threads, I am left with these thoughts: 1) Just because the Republicans won in 2004, and now control all 3 branches, does not mean they should consider this turn of events as free reign to do whatever the hell they please - although they seem to have done just that. There is this thing called "consequences" that has a nasty way of biting you in the ass when you least expect it - as the Republicans are just now finding out. 2) This isn't about ruling the Republican Party - it's about ruling America. As such, whether you wish to see 2004 as a mandate or not (laughable!), there should be more than a little concern about appearing even-handed to ALL Americans and NOT just to your Republican base, especially considering that the electorate is so firmly polarized. I think the word is called "grace". 3) No one on this site expects Bush to nominate a liberal or a Democrat or even a centrist fer chrissakes. Give us a little credit. However, we DO expect Bush to nominate someone who is NOT a fringe-dweller but who is merely right-of-center, AND who is thoroughly well-qualified for the position - as John Roberts was and is. 4) This is not some slick partisan board game; this is our childrens' future. Frankly, I don't give a rat's ass WHO Bush nominates so long as they have a deep affinity for due process and equal protection under the laws - and strong deference (but not a fawning defernece) to stare decisis. 5) Lastly, tell me your head wouldn't explode if a leftist Dem was in control now, along with ALL 3 branches of government, and said Dem nominated someone of the ilk of like say ... Jesse Jackson to the Supreme Court. Very likely, there would be blood in the streets. So: have a little humility. Just a little. And let's pray for another legal leviathan like John Roberts. Preferably a female version.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    Lvcat-I agree with most of what you write except this: how do you know that Roberts is slightly right of center? No documents were handed over and he was far from forthright in his answers. He is a mystery man and my bet is that he is far right extremist groomed for the job. Billmon makes a point that he can not worse than Rehnquist, I am not so sure.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    Squeaky: I agree - it's a crap shoot, ultimately. It's just a matter of faith, unfortunately. While I agree w/ Sen. Leahy on this point, I would have voted no, if only because of Roberts' obvious stonewalling. I am hoping that if this man loves the law as deeply as he claims to, then he will place the ideal over the ideological. God knows, we sure as hell don't need another flack in the mold of Scalia or Thomas. Remember when "advice and consent" actually meant something meaningful? However, the Senate has no one to blame but themselves for their becoming almost irrelevant to the whole confirmation process. Quite honestly, I doubt the Dems gave much of a sh## since Roberts' nomination was nothing more than a foregone conclusion. As JR might say: "They who have the most votes win". Too true, in this case.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#12)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    I think the dems were also afraid that opposing the nominee would not be popular. Little do they know that it will backfire for the next elections. When Roberts shows his true colors, worse than Scalia or Thomas, the public will freak and vote them out.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    Squeaky: Here's my theory on why the Dems split their vote with Roberts. The pro-Roberts Dems have now shown their constituents that they are moderates, willing to vote for moderate nominees. They will now have no problem voting NO for the next nominee - and rationalizing it - on the basis that the new nominee is too controversial - whether true or not. It's all about positioning. The no-Roberts Dems have pretty much taken your position to heart, with the party stalwarts positioning themselves for "bigger things" or, at least, ensuring their survival back home. These are the Dems who will hammer the next nominee (if only because they now have no choice; in for a penny, in for a pound). Overall, I give Bushrove credit for splitting the Dems over Roberts; very adroit choice. However, I don't think lightning is going to strike twice. I remain with the prediction that the next nominee will be in for one hell of a fight if they are not clearly centrist.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    They just have to come up with another candidate whose public records are scare and the meat of documents are top secret and cannot be revealed because of national security or attorney client privelege. Nice looking family person everyone will love like Roberts a true TV personalty. Stacking the court with political operatives is the plan and the dems will just roll over because the spin meisters got the right public image with no content revealed. The only way to go is this: test Roberts out for a few years before letting another Bush appontment send us back to the middle ages. When there is a less radical administration in place 'advise and concent' will be the working model.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:31 PM EST
    Posted by James Robertson: "Start winning elections." Give those THIRTY STATES their auditable paper trail back, James, and the American people will, once again, put the rightwing out of power so fast (in the House and White House), it would make your wig spin.

    Re: List of Consensus Nominees (none / 0) (#16)
    by ntnelson on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:32 PM EST
    I don't know that much about Ed Prado, but I'm assuming that he's liberal on nearly every social issue. Could someone give me a little more information on this guy?

    List of Consensus Nominees | 16 comments (16 topical)