I could totally see him nominate Joe Biden...given that Joe missed his chance to run for the presidency.

Okiedokie.

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2016, 07:38 PM - Edit history (1)

She is one of the largest beneficiaries of that decision?

by President Obama. It will be up to the next President.

That said, we will have a much more liberal SC for the next year or so.

who is actively running for President at the moment. It is possible to imagine in a couple of weeks, her deciding her campaign is dead in the water, and Obama nominating her. I suppose she would pretty much breeze through the confirmation porcess.

Personally, I'm not entirely certain I would be that crazy about her being on the Supreme Court, but since I've stated more than once that I think that as nominations occur in the next few years, whoever is President should nominate only women, until we have nine female justices, and it should remain that way for as along as only men were on the SC. And so, Hillary would be a good choice in that regard.

K.

No one seemed to think that was a problem.

Men often don't quite get it. Someone was complaining here that there was a debate analysis that was done completely by women. So? Does that person never get bothered when it's only men presenting analysis?

I do recognize that my dream of a completely female Supreme Court isn't very likely to happen. But by putting it out there, maybe people will think about this.

Oh, and among the reasons we have all these awful restrictions of abortion is that the state legislatures are mostly men. Yes, I understand there are plenty of men out there who do sincerely support abortion rights, but sadly very few of them are in elected office.

I don't have a problem with her running.

She is not interested and Obama knows that.

Hillary has to quit so Bernie will win? LOL. Bernie is that entitled to win?

Not the strongest argument to bolster Sanders' supposed strength.

Surely there is someone in their 40s- 50s who would be a good pick. Whether they could get through is obviously another story.

definitely not a judge. H'e probably not a realistic candidate. With the ages of sitting justices, I suspect the WH has a pretty deep bench of potentital nominees.

i just think of how everyone is saying scalia was a scholar and we know how that turned out

polluted by ideology.

And you don't have to have a law degree to be nominated to the Court.

Anyway, I'm sure Arkansas is good enough.

that one hits the court?

So we can have a liberal court for the next 20-30 years.

...although it could be a recess appointment. Current investigations would be problematic.
That said, although there are no set qualifications to be a SC Justice, my personal opinion is she's not qualified. However, that didn't stop Thomas from being named to the court, and Clinton sure would be better than Scalia. Overall, I'd back the appointment as it gets her out of the race, and the DNC elites aren't going to be able to field a candidate that can catch Sanders momentum.