home

Orrin Hatch Stirs Up Rumor Pot on Stevens' Successor

By Jeralyn, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:25:31 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Leave it to Sen. Orrin Hatch to stir up rumors and serve up distraction, this time, with comments about whether Obama would nominate Hillary Clinton for the Supreme Court. Hatch says it's possible.

Stay focused, people. It's not going to happen.

< Connecticut Supreme Court Affirms Michael Skakel Conviction | New Forfeiture Report Blasts "Policing for Profit" >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Orrin Hatch Stirs Up Rumor Pot on Stevens' Successor | 63 comments (63 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Orrin Hatch (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by shoephone on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:39:07 PM EST
    Like so many other ancient GOPers, he's dancing as fast as he can to stay relevant and in the news.

    You know the old saying: Desperate men do desperate things.

    He really is (none / 0) (#39)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:09:50 PM EST
    pathetic, isn't he?

    Parent
    Yes, and consistently so. (none / 0) (#51)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 05:21:24 PM EST


    Parent
    The only possible (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by brodie on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:00:37 PM EST
    way Hillary gets on the Ct is if the CJ position were to suddenly become open for Obama.  She would have some female Earl Warren potential, seems to me, once she got passed a rw radio/Tea Bagger-driven nasty, but successful, senate confirmation.

    Doesn't seem to be in the cards though.

    Dem presidents just don't get the luck of picking the CJ.  Not since LBJ fumbled the ball with his crony Fortas pick of 42 yrs ago.  The judicial gods have been punishing Dems ever since for that one.

    She does not have (none / 0) (#41)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:13:55 PM EST
    the temperament to become a judicial cloistered monk.  Not gah happen.

    Parent
    The position is largely ceremonial (none / 0) (#43)
    by MKS on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:21:54 PM EST
    There isn't a lot of control the Chief Justice has....the key is to get five votes for any decision...... and the Senior Justice in the majority gets to assign who writes the opinion iirc.

    The case load is determined by the grant of certiorari, etc., and that takes 4 votes, I believe;  the Chief Justice does not do much on his or her own.

    Parent

    Of course in the hypothetical (none / 0) (#48)
    by brodie on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:35:01 PM EST
    scenario where the current CJ has stepped down and Hillary is picked to replace him, it would create a sudden 5-4 mod-lib majority, and thus the positive challenge to corral at least those 5 and perhaps make some important progressive history in Scotus jurisprudence, à la Warren though with a narrower majority mostly.

    That wouldn't be a bad way to finish off the last 15-20 yrs or so of one's public service career.  Especially if it's true that she might be burnt out from all the current jet-lagged traveling and from all she had to endure in her last grueling political campaign.

    But alas this is all unlikely, and we're probably stuck with Roberts for a long while yet.

    Parent

    Yes. (none / 0) (#44)
    by brodie on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:24:04 PM EST
    That was the idea of course with the attempted promotion by Lyndon of crony Fortas from AJ to CJ in 1968.  What a mess though it turned out to be, starting with CJ Warren's sudden retirement announcement coming in a heated presidential election year.  (LBJ actually was going for a crony two-fer -- Fortas' AJ slot was then supposed to be filled by TX judge and Johnson ally Homer Thornberry.  So much for Lyndon's alleged legendary ability to bend Congress to his will ...)

    Of course, Obama has now made clear he won't be nominating Hillary for AJ, so all this is moot.

     

    Parent

    If this was 2000 (none / 0) (#57)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 08:47:13 PM EST
    she'd be an ideal non-conventional canidate (unfortunately, she'd also be someone who'd never served in any official capacity other than the Watergate hearings) it is perhaps the ultimate cruelty that by the time that canidates recieve the seasoning I'd prefer for SC justices they're either too old to take full advantage of the "lifetime appointment" or too exposed ideologically to achieve confirmation.  (seriously, is Bork the last nominee who wasn't to some extent a cipher- I mean we knew how conservative Roberts and Alito were and the GOP knew how liberal Ginsburg was- but in terms of clearly established scholarship and/or opinions?) I mean I'm not sure how other people on here would react but if not for age (and gender to an extent) Tribe and Lessig would be interesting canidates (Tribe's ability to disarm the gunuts would have given him a chance in much the same way as Kagan's terror stuff will give her a villager stamp of approval, while Lessig's IP stuff is what made it the first legal blog I started reading back in High School- LD debate ftw).   I mean honestly- as far as age goes Obama himself is in the sweet spot for a male, and 55 or so is the where I'd top it out for both sexes.

    Parent
    Hatch probably only invoked Hillary's (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Anne on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 02:57:10 PM EST
    name because it was the closest he could get to "Osama bin Laden," and still rile everybody up; it's like they just can't stand to let too much time pass without reminding their constituents of the evil that lurks within the Democratic party, and checking to see if the media will go along with the "polarizing" meme.

    If the weather was as predictable as these guys, we'd never be caught in the rain without an umbrella ever again.


    But he is a little off in his timing (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by MKS on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:25:19 PM EST
    the "polarizing" label is passe'.

    As Secretary of State, the job requires tact, among other things, and she has done her job well.....

    No new ideas from Hatch, we can see.....

    Parent

    The GOPers (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 11:01:38 PM EST
    are nowhere near as anti-Hillary as they used to be.  Folks here I think haven't spent quite enough time listening to and reading them over the last couple years.

    They rather like her these days because, A, she's not Obama, and B, they think she's much more hawkish than she is, and C, she goes on Fox regularly and has turned out not to be anything resembling the "far left" dragon lady they thought she was.

    I actually think if Obama did nominate her (which he won't, and which she wouldn't accept if he did), she'd get through pretty easily.

    Parent

    Agree, it sounds exactly (none / 0) (#38)
    by Wile ECoyote on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:00:45 PM EST
    like the left mentioning Bush or Cheney.

    Parent
    I agree, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#1)
    by Zorba on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:31:24 PM EST
    It's not going to happen.

    Let's keep the little lady as SOS. (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:36:06 PM EST


    She might be one of the only people (none / 0) (#4)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:39:30 PM EST
    we have to keep the neocons that Obama has chosen to hang onto in check.  I'd really rather she stay put.

    Parent
    Donald, I think that (none / 0) (#34)
    by Zorba on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 03:44:52 PM EST
    I really would like your mother.  She sounds like my kind of person.

    Parent
    I am fairly certain (none / 0) (#37)
    by lilburro on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 03:53:59 PM EST
    oculus was snarking.

    Parent
    Reminds me of my Mom too (none / 0) (#42)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:17:41 PM EST
    Of course, this is off subject and so I want to interject that I never gave HRC a thought for the SCOTUS but, hey,I think it would be really cool. She would make a great justice and never have to campaign again. We can dream, can't we?

    As for Moms, my Dad was stationed there also. Before I was born BTW. But,apparently my Mom had not heard from my Dad and so she takes a train down to CL. On the train, she meeds a group of top officer's wives. They take her in their group, hear her story, and say, don't worry about it, we will have our husbands take care of it. Sure enough, they arrive, call my Dad to headquarters, and he was in total panic and sure he was getting the brig. They gave him a one night pass when no body was getting passes, and sent them off to dinner. My Mom was satisfied everything was ok, my Dad was still horrified at being singled out. My Mom had a really great personality and could meet people on a dime. It sure worked that time.  

    Parent

    So, the Kaneohe base drew you to Hawaii? (none / 0) (#46)
    by MKS on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:28:46 PM EST


    Parent
    Could happen. We could also get hit (none / 0) (#5)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:43:30 PM EST
    by an asteroid....doubtful that will happen in my lifetime (either).

    small asteroids (none / 0) (#8)
    by CST on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:51:08 PM EST
    hit earth on a not-so-infrequent basis.

    There have been many in your lifetime already :)

    Probably won't see Hillary in the supreme court though.

    Parent

    Correction (none / 0) (#11)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:55:21 PM EST
    MAJOR asteroid, you know, the catastrophic kind.

    Parent
    Would a Pres., who as his party's (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:46:09 PM EST
    nominee and as Jr. Senator from IL, voted for FISA revise, nominate to SCOTUS a person, who as Jr. Senator from NY, voted against the FISA revise?

    HUH? (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:59:56 PM EST
    Do you mean this vote, before either Hillary or Obama became the Presumptive Democratic Nominee?

    Both sat that one out... lol.

    But we will never know what Hillary would have done, had she been the presumptive nominee, will we.

    And if you think his rightward shift had nothing to do with the game change, I have a bridge to sell you..

     

    Parent

    No. This one: (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:05:14 PM EST
    NYT

    Parent
    Yes Obviously That One (none / 0) (#19)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:14:23 PM EST
    Allthough I thought you would like to see a comparison vote when the Dem candidates were neck and neck... lol

    This question/statement remains the same:

    And if you think his rightward shift had nothing to do with the game change, I have a bridge to sell you..


    Parent
    I think you missed the ball big time here. (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by oculus on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:15:45 PM EST


    Parent
    What? (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:22:41 PM EST
    When Obama secured the Democratic nomination he moved right. That is a fact.

    Picking Biden, drilling offshore energy policy in Aug..

    He chose to pander to a much larger crowd than his state constituents.

    Hillary would have done the same, imo. She was representing her constituency, NY State.  

    Parent

    I'm looking for a bridge to buy, (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:49:15 PM EST
    tell me more :) I've noticed you have been trying to sell it for awhile now.

    Length, width, over a river, lake, freeway, railroad? More details, please :) Any offers as yet?


    Parent

    Now That You Mention It (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 02:21:21 PM EST
    I have several, each one can be tailored to your needs, they are all pretty expensive though, but I am sure we can work out a deal, payment plan etc.. lol

    Parent
    LOL - As long as it is NOT a bridge to nowhere (none / 0) (#30)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 03:13:30 PM EST
    That one, I'm not buying :)

    Parent
    Maybe That's Good (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:48:02 PM EST
    As she is the most eeeeevil one that the GOP can imagine, that is next to Bill...

    Anyone else has to look good, relatively speaking, to the GOP.

    But I have no illusions, they would even threaten to fillibuster a right winger. It is all about positioning, and nothing about content or substance. The message is: the Democrats can do nothing right. Nothing else matters.

    I think they'd (none / 0) (#58)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 08:49:46 PM EST
    take Bill before Hillary, god know's I'd take his GOP equivalent if we'd had the chance- moderate, but in his 60s with one heart surgery already- if I could switch his health profile with Robert's I'd do it in a heartbeat- Hill on the other hand is a woman in good health in her early 60s she could go 2 decades.  

    Parent
    Yes, But (none / 0) (#62)
    by squeaky on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 09:58:42 PM EST
    You would have to be very sensitive to notice the subtle differences in their lockstep opposition to Bill and Hillary.  But yes, I think if they were able to think about it without short-circuiting, they would much prefer Bill.

    Parent
    If asked, I hope she would say no. (none / 0) (#9)
    by masslib on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:51:52 PM EST


    Why? (none / 0) (#12)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:55:57 PM EST
    nt

    Parent
    Because she has a future (none / 0) (#17)
    by masslib on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:07:16 PM EST
    in politics, if she wants it.  

    But this is moot anyway.  I agree with Jeralyn.  This isn't going to happen.  She's a politician and I don't see Obama appointing a pol to the court.

    Parent

    I don't think Obama is (none / 0) (#21)
    by brodie on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:17:05 PM EST
    averse to naming a pol to the Ct.  It just has to be the right one, with all the major factors to be considered.  Including whether the pol brings anything special or exciting to the table, and really wants the job.

    Earl Warren really really wanted to go onto the Court.  Bruce Babbitt probably would have wanted it.  Mario Cuomo dithered and finally said no to Clinton.

    Parent

    Few pols have made it to the Court. (none / 0) (#23)
    by masslib on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:33:27 PM EST
    I don't think Obama is inclined to nominate one.  And, I don't think it would be Hillary if he were to.

    Parent
    If Spitzer (none / 0) (#59)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 08:50:33 PM EST
    hadn't flaked out spectacularly he'd be an interesting canidate.

    Parent
    Anyone who thinks . . . (none / 0) (#68)
    by rea on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:39:04 AM EST
    . . . career appellate judges aren't politicians, hasn't had much to do with career appellate judges.

    Parent
    Touche (none / 0) (#70)
    by masslib on Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 03:29:25 PM EST


    Parent
    Hatch is just talkin' out of his hatch. (none / 0) (#10)
    by desertswine on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:55:04 PM EST


    I think Obama is keeping her in reserve, in case (none / 0) (#13)
    by steviez314 on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 12:59:37 PM EST
    in 2012 he needs her as the VP nominee (Biden retires gracefully).

    Could be. (none / 0) (#18)
    by brodie on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:11:27 PM EST
    It's not that far fetched.

    Not many Secretaries of State serve more than 4 yrs.  I can think of only one who's done two full terms -- Dean Rusk in the 60s.

    But it has been a trend (not always a good one) for the VP in the first term to serve again in the 2d.  FDR wisely kept his options open.  THere were those rumors about JFK dumping LBJ for '64.  And Poppy supposedly seriously considered dumping Danny for 92 (and later regretted not pulling that trigger).  Ike too with Dick in '56.  Etc.  

    Parent

    She has already said she won't serve a (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:45:24 PM EST
    second term as SOS.

    Parent
    We see mostly only (none / 0) (#40)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:12:49 PM EST
    the embarrassing gaffe-prone public side of Biden.  From what I read, he's become very much relied on and influential inside the White House.  Very, very, very much doubt he's in line to get dumped as VP in 2012.

    Parent
    It could happen if (none / 0) (#49)
    by brodie on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:40:48 PM EST
    Obama needed something fairly big to shake things up for re-elect, assuming the economy and jobs aren't quite where they should be at that time.  At which point Biden would be asked to take one for the team and given his choice of other posts -- SecDef or State or whatever.

    Parent
    I don't think a Vice Preisdent pick (none / 0) (#53)
    by tigercourse on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 06:33:32 PM EST
    really effects 2nd elections very much. It matters more when someone is running for the first time and voters don't know enough about them and want to be reassured by the 2nd in command pick.

    Parent
    I would think that all depends on (none / 0) (#56)
    by Inspector Gadget on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 08:41:51 PM EST
    who the POTUS is and who the VP is.

    Seems it would be very smart, if there is a strong belief that the POTUS will be elected to a second term, to put a VP in place who could likely win at the top of the ticket 4 years down the road. In fact, I think the belief many voters have that the VP is the next most likely candidate for POTUS would make the VP an exceptionally important choice for second term.


    Parent

    See (none / 0) (#60)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 08:55:16 PM EST
    for all the crap he gets for his public appearances- Biden might be the top FP guy in the Admin, I mean Hillary and Obama himself have good credentials (If you actually look at Obama's Nuke creds it makes Palin's criticism even more laughable than it was on the surface- not just the work with Lugar but his thesis at Columbia)- I mean it was basically his raison d'etre in the Senate for two-and-a-half decades.

    Parent
    Now that's (none / 0) (#24)
    by Zorba on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 01:43:33 PM EST
    a very interesting speculation, and you could well be right on the money.

    Parent
    If she was (none / 0) (#27)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 02:13:47 PM EST
    10 years younger she'd be a strong  nonconvetional pick. Of course then Hatch wouldn't have mentioned  her.

    She might (none / 0) (#47)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:33:14 PM EST
    get in.  She's very well liked in the Senate, even among Repubs.

    In the past (none / 0) (#61)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 08:56:56 PM EST
    a Senator was basically a rubber stamp confirm- heck John "too crazy to beat a corpse" Ashcroft got a pass to be AG in large part due to comity.

    Parent
    Hillary's Temperament (none / 0) (#50)
    by nycvoter on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 05:13:07 PM EST
    She does not have (none / 0) (#41)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 04:13:55 PM EST

    the temperament to become a judicial cloistered monk.  Not gah happen.

    Funny you should say that.  I was with Hillary after the campaign was over (with about 60 women) and she said exactly the same thing!

    There you go! (none / 0) (#65)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 11:03:18 PM EST
    Spending the rest of her productive life poring over lawbooks is just not where she's at.  And what a waste of a great political talent it would be.

    Parent
    If she were nominated, there is real potential for (none / 0) (#52)
    by steviez314 on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 05:54:36 PM EST
    karmic justice:

    Imagine those Health Care Reform lawsuits proceed all the way up to the SC..and in 2014 or so, the court rules that it is constitutional, with the 5-4 decision being written by...Hillary.

    Okay, that gave me a karmic giggle. (none / 0) (#54)
    by Cream City on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 07:05:29 PM EST
    Thanks!

    Parent
    You are all wrong! (none / 0) (#55)
    by diogenes on Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 07:59:24 PM EST
    Now Hatch has said that the GOP would support Hillary if nominated.  Thus, the GOP is not the "party of no" but simply a party that will oppose any liberal choice made by Obama; this decreases the strength of claims made that the Repubs would oppose anyone nominated.  Obama should call their bluff.    
    Also independents actually have some goodwill towards Hillary.  In fact, her nomination would fly through as Hatch is saying.

    Hillary is going to be Pope. (none / 0) (#67)
    by observed on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 07:16:47 AM EST
    The conspiracy against Ratzinger by the you know who's is all about paving the way for history's second female pope. As Pope Innocent XX, she will work together with the trilateral commission and the alien known as Tiny Tim to establish a one solar system government.
    If Obama were smart he'd offer it (none / 0) (#69)
    by BobTinKY on Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 08:41:27 PM EST
    and if HRC were smart she'd accept,  Afghanistan is a clusterf*ck that is only going to get worse and being SoS is not going to be fun.

    She'd be at least as progressive and probably more so than any of the others mentioned, and she'd get confirmed.

    Orrin Hatch Stirs Up Rumor Pot on Stevens' Successor | 63 comments (63 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment