Justice Souter to retire from SCOTUS?

Aramazd

Deity
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
3,786
Location
San Jose, California
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30508968/
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court Justice David Souter plans to retire, after more than 19 years on the court, once the current term ends in late June, NBC News reported Thursday night. A retirement by Souter, 69, would give President Barack Obama his first chance to nominate a justice and the next few months would bring Senate confirmation hearings. His departure, however, isn't likely to change the court's liberal-conservative composition, because his successor will almost certainly be moderate to liberal, NBC News correspondent Pete Williams reported.
At 69, Souter is not the oldest member of the court. He has indicated in the past that he wanted to leave Washington and return to his native New Hampshire. Souter's early signaling of his intention to step down is almost certainly a move to let the White House get prepared to nominate a replacement, Williams reported.

Other candidates for retirement
The other candidates for retirement are Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 76, and Stevens, 89, although neither has betrayed any intention of leaving. Ginsburg, who is undergoing chemotherapy following surgery for pancreatic cancer in February, said she wants to serve into her 80s.
Speculation about Souter's plans had begun to swirl this week because the eight other justices were known to have hired the four law clerks who will work with them in the Supreme Court term that begins in October. Souter had been the lone holdout, hiring no one.
In 1990, Republican President George H.W. Bush nominated Souter for the position of Supreme Court justice. Little was known of his positions on issues at the forefront of the news, such as abortion, and it was hoped by conservatives that his literal interpretations of the Constitution would work in their favor. However, Souter's interpretations of the Constitution were more liberal than the Republican Party had hoped.
According to Biography Resource Center Online, during the Casey v. Planned Parenthood case, Souter voted to uphold the Roe v. Wade decision governing a woman's right to an abortion and also voted to prohibit prayer at high school graduation ceremonies in Lee v. Weisman.
In defense of his abortion stance, Souter wrote that, as a nation, we have come to rely on the "availability of abortion" and to overturn Roe v.Wade would be "a surrender to political pressure ... so to overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to re-examine a watershed decision would subvert the Court's legitimacy beyond any serious question."
Since that time he consistently voted on the more liberal sides of issues.
Yet as Souter biographer Tinsley Yarbrough noted, "he doesn't take extreme positions." Indeed, in June, Souter sided with Exxon Mobil Corp. and broke with his liberal colleagues in slashing the punitive damages the company owed Alaskan victims of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
Souter is the court's 105th justice, only its sixth bachelor. He works seven days a week through most of the court's October-to-July terms, a pace that he says leaves time for little else. He told an audience this year that he undergoes "an annual intellectual lobotomy" each fall.
Souter attended Harvard University, graduating Phi Betta Kappa in 1961 with a major in philosophy. Before returning to Harvard to attend law school, Souter won a Rhodes Scholarship to Magdalen College at Oxford.
He became New Hampshire's attorney general in 1976 and became a state court judge two years later. By 1990, he was on the federal appeals court in Boston for only a few months when Bush picked him to replace Justice William Brennan on the Supreme Court

Interesting. Obama might be able to appoint 3 justices to the Supreme Court. Kind of important now that the liberal justices are getting old.
 
I'm sure the Republicans will be calling for an immediate up-or-down vote for whoever Obama nominates.
 
I'm sure the Republicans will be calling for an immediate up-or-down vote for whoever Obama nominates.
That would be a nice change from what Clarence Thomas had to endure.
It's not, but I figured Ginsburg would be the first to leave.
Nah, she's like Strom Thurmon......... too power hungry to give it up until death.
 
I recall there was some discussion during the campaign that Judge Judy might be appointed to the supreme court.
 
This is good, it allows Obama to maintain the appropriate liberal/conservative balance and will be a litmus test for all his rhetoric, ie whether he picks an ideologe or a moderate of the same suit as Souter. I am confident he will go with a moderate.
 
Apologies on the thread spam – somehow I missed that Abgar beat me to the punch…

This is good, it allows Obama to maintain the appropriate liberal/conservative balance and will be a litmus test for all his rhetoric, ie whether he picks an ideologe or a moderate of the same suit as Souter. I am confident he will go with a moderate.

It will be interesting to see who he picks. I too think he will go fairly moderate, but I am sure that no matter who he picks some people will be screaming about it. Actually if he really does pick a moderate I imagine he will get it from both sides.

I’m just sad that Hillary already has a seat at the table… It would have been really fun to watch the right blow its top over that one! I guess there still is Bill… :mischief:
 
The buzz for his replacement is mostly centering around Sonia Sotomayor, who just fills off a bunch of little checkboxes. What he's said he wants is someone with a background that leads to allot of personal empathy, and great credentials. Politically of course, he wants someone with minority status and someone young.

[Empathy]Sotomayor grew up in the South Bronx as a the child of a poor single mother after her father, who became a highly skilled worker in the manufacturing industry despite getting only a third grade education, died. And she had diabetes. Honestly, it's practically a sappy pre-teen girl's novel.

[Credentials] Summa Cum Laude at Princeton, Editor of the Yale Law Review, where she got her J.D.

[Politics] Mixed. Limbaugh hates her, and most conservatives lump her in as another judicial activist. However she was first appointed by Bush Sr. to a District Court because of a reputation for centrism, and even now some of the far left aren't happy with the idea of her nomination. So, basically in the same ballpark as Souter.

[Age]A veritable spring chicken at 54. Same age as the boy wonder Roberts is now.

[Minorities] Woman, Hispanic (Puerto Rican). Diabetic, and divorced too if anyone cares.
 
I'll give Thomas props for being the most consistent current Justice in terms of sticking to a judicial philosophy. Its kind of sad that Scalia gets props for being an originalist when his biggest opinions such as Heller can be seen as progeny of Griswold. Thomas is more of the real deal and I can respect his consistency while not agreeing with his conclusions.
 
I'm going to assume you know nothing about Thomas. :lol:

I know he doesn't belong on the Court. I know his judicial philosophy is bitterness over the fact that he could not have gotten where he is without AA.
 
I'll give Thomas props for being the most consistent current Justice in terms of sticking to a judicial philosophy. Its kind of sad that Scalia gets props for being an originalist when his biggest opinions such as Heller can be seen as progeny of Griswold. Thomas is more of the real deal and I can respect his consistency while not agreeing with his conclusions.

Ditto here.

As for Obama's future nominee, I'm quite curious. Sure he said he'd nominate 'someone with empathy' but it certainly wouldn't be the first campaign promise (and a pretty flimsy one at that) that he's broken. My hopes are pretty low though - if it isn't a HarrietMiers-esque candidate and it isn't a Clinton, I'll be a little relieved. But please sir, can you at least pick someone who isn't going to treat executive power or interstate commerce regulation as pretty much inviolate?
 
I’m just sad that Hillary already has a seat at the table… It would have been really fun to watch the right blow its top over that one! I guess there still is Bill… :mischief:
There is nothing to prevent her from riding her broom from her current post to being the nominee.
Thomas deserves whatever he gets. He's got to be one of the worst SC Justices in history.
That is one of the most poorly thought out posts I have read. Even if you think he's doing a horrible job, you could not have had that opinion during the confirmation, so it makes no sense for you to say he deserved what he got when you're mad about (God knows what) things he's done since then.
I know he doesn't belong on the Court. I know his judicial philosophy is bitterness over the fact that he could not have gotten where he is without AA.
AA is a bad joke. It is reverse racism, and it is time for it to end.
 
Anyways, this is going to be hilarious. Biden's supposed to be point man on this project. He was head of the Judiciary Council for years, and he has chaired the nomination of more SC justices than any man alive.

The Republican talent just bolted his party. That's pretty big. being ranking member on the judiciary is a big responsibility at times like these, as their staff is supposed to do the footwork on investigating nominees. And of course, Specter is well experienced with these things, as Bork and Thomas can confirm. Who's going to replace Specter? Looks like Jeff Session of Alabama.
 
Top Bottom