2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSupreme Court retirements?
Does anyone want to share their thoughts on Supreme Court retirements?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (currently 79) will probably retire in early 2015.
Anthony Kennedy (currently 76) said that he doesn't want to retire under Obama.
Antonin Scalia (currently 76) hasn't really said much: "I'm probably too stupid to have this job at this point. But I don't know what else I'd do."
NYtoBush-Drop Dead
(490 posts)Are smote!
illegaloperation
(260 posts)I am guessing that Kennedy and Scalia will retire on their deathbed (or if there's another Republican president - a big IF).
trueblue2007
(17,138 posts)Antonin Scalia (currently 76) hasn't really said much: "I'm probably too stupid to have this job at this point. But I don't know what else I'd do."
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)illegaloperation
(260 posts)Gingsburg will be 82 in March 2015.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Justice Louis Brandeis was on the Supreme Court of the United States from June 1, 1916 February 13, 1939 - 22 years, 8 months, 2 weeks
Justice Ginsburg has been on the Supreme Court since August 10, 1993.
So, if she wants to beat his tenure then she couldn't retire until the end of April 2016
That would still leave enough time for President Obama's to appoint a new justice and get him/her confirmed before he leaves office January 20, 2017.
illegaloperation
(260 posts)"I was appointed at age 60, the same age that Louis Bidenz Brandeis was when he was appointed to the court. He stayed until he was 82. So I do have a way to go"
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)illegaloperation
(260 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)That 2010 article says:
Through the end of Obama's first term. But it doesn't say that he will not retire during Obama's second term.
So there is still hope that he will retire in the next few years before Obama leaves office in January 2017.
illegaloperation
(260 posts)Here's a translation of what he said: I will retire as soon as a Republican president comes along and that could have been as soon as 2013.
Of cause I am hoping that he retires right away, but that may have to be out of illness.
Also, I doubt that Obama will be able to realistically appoint a new justice after 2015. The Republicans will hold up the nomination in hope that they win the Presidency.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... if a retirement or death were to happen in the first few months of 2016.
Obama doesn't leave office until January 2017.
I doubt that Kennedy will wait until 2017, and I doubt that Ginsburg would retire before 2016.
I watched Ginsburg on C-Span last week giving a Q&A and she is still pretty spunky
illegaloperation
(260 posts)You see, it is election year. Republicans will filibuster the nominee just like they did when LBJ was president.
If Ginsburg choose not to retire by 2015, what happened to Thurgood Marshall may happen again.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Each one will be a battle in The Senate, but in the end all of em' will be confirmed.
That is what I believe.
Let's talk again at the end of 2016
illegaloperation
(260 posts)In my humble opinion, Obama will be lucky if he gets to appoint 2 more justices: one to replace Ginsburg and the other to replace Kennedy or Scalia.
Also, replace a justice with one of opposite ideology tends to be quite difficult. Thomas got confirmed with 52 votes.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)It would bring his total up to 4, almost half the court.
Bake
(21,977 posts)Oh wait ... he didn't. Thanks a lot, Harry.
Bake
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)I always get the Pope and Scalia mixed up.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)They do both wear silly hats.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The Pope wouldn't be good enough to kiss his feet.
Justice
(7,182 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)....but only half the passenger fee.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)The easiest way to get some of the 5 to retire is to make sure Hillary is seen as President early
Which I think already has happened.
and is why the court took so many really important cases this year. I predict 2 retirements
of the 5 bad ones, along with 2 others in in the next few years.
That would make 4 replacements needed.
However, will the rightwing allow a pick to go to vote in 2013 or 2014?
And who will the pick be?
If I were President Obama, the next pick should be a confrontational one, with a solid back up if the first one fails.
that being the case,
if it were me, I would nominate Eric Holder to SCOTUS and let them spend all their capital attempting to stop it.
Be interesting to see if he could get it through.
After all, Thurgood Marshall has never been replaced and time is right for that to happen.
That said, my personal #1 pick would be Goodwin Liu, however, that too would be extremely hard at this point to get confirmed, and might have to wait til a later date.(He is only 43 so there is alot of time. Hillary could nominate him in 2017.
Normally, the opposition can only stop one pick. So it is possible if say Holder failed, Liu could be next.
Then in 2018, I want President Hillary Clinton to nominate Barack Obama to the US Supreme Court and do like President Taft did after he was President.
President Obama was born to be on the US Supreme Court.
jerseyjack
(1,361 posts)Bake
(21,977 posts)Bake
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)President Obama will not leaving the White House until January 2017.
He will need to have more than one year off after leaving office, probably two or three.
He'll need to work on his presidential library (planning, fundraising, etc).
And will probably write a book.
And spend some time relaxing...
Etc.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)The court ends in June. Most always nowadays, the Justices retire at end of current year
(which is June).
now, wouldn't it be great if luck has it that Clarence Thomas is the one President Obama replaces? Truly a worthy pick to finally continue the legacy of Justice Thurgood Marshall.
(of course, it would be great if Thomas retires earlier than that, but let's assume he doesn't.)
The court most likely would at that time be 7 to 2. And in a few years after,
elevated to Chief Justice.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)-snip-
In the justices' private conferences, the current practice is for them to speak and vote in order of seniority from the Chief Justice first to the most junior Associate Justice last. The most junior Associate Justice in these conferences is tasked with any menial labor the justices may require as they convene alone, such as answering the door of their conference room, serving coffee, and transmitting the orders of the Court to the court's clerk. Justice Joseph Story served the longest as the junior justice, from February 3, 1812, to September 1, 1823, for a total of 4,228 days. Justice Stephen Breyer follows close behind, with 4,199 days when Samuel Alito joined the court on January 31, 2006
-snip-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court#Seniority_and_seating
I do not like the fact that a 'Justice' Obama would have to 'serve' coffee to the republican justices.
So, the only way to get around that is to wait and have Obama appointed as 'Chief Justice'
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)It is normally known when someone is going to retire, and it is possible two people could be known to retire at close to the same time.
(Normally they space it out so that the confirmation process is kept easier, but if the democratic party has a big majority ( 2016 is going to be much easier to secure more senate seats), it will make everything a lot easier.
So that theoretically, President Obama can be nominated,then confirmed, followed by another nominee shortly thereafter.
I don't think it bothered Taft to be junior Justice.
For Chief Justice, one would have to wait til Roberts retires.
Hopefully he will have lots of grandkids or great grandkids and want to spend alot of time with them knowing that the republicans will never be back in power, so his voice is not worth much anymore.
madinmaryland
(64,920 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)May he burn there forever.
Bake
(21,977 posts)Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Bake
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)I'm similar; some of scalia's rulings, like the recent one feb 2013 on voting rights, have convinced me that there is a god. At least in human form who thinks he is one.
Roman emperor caligula, near when jesus died, also thought himself a god.
Emperor Scaligula.
Caligula also appointed a horse to be a senator in rome's senate (true), scalia has his own horse of sorts, clarence the mule.
But no Mr Ed is clarence, Mr Ed talked.
haha, on edit thought of a joke:
What's the difference between clarence the mule & Mr Ed?
Mr Ed could talk! hahahaha
sofa king
(10,857 posts)Clarence Thomas in particular has documented ethics violations that qualify him for easy impeachment, and it stands to reason that flipping those rocks will reveal some of Scalia's bugs as well.
Probably a little wishful, as it would also require the Republicans to self-destruct in the House, but they are graciously trying their best to do so in 2014. If both things happen, those two will get the hell out as fast as they can.
illegaloperation
(260 posts)Democrats had 60 senate seats, yet Scalia and Thomas are sill on the Supreme Court.
sofa king
(10,857 posts)The Democrats had 60 seats from July 7, 2009, when Al Franken was finally confirmed, until about twelve working days later, when Congress went into August recess. Then Ted Kennedy died over the recess.
A theoretical 60 seats was again achieved on September 25, and Congress actually worked about half of the weekdays available through February 4, 2010.
At no time during that period did Democrats actually have 60 seats, because the 60th was Joe Lieberman, who would have defended his true benefactors to the end.
At no time during that period did Republicans ever relinquish control of the House, so impeachment proceedings would never have been initiated.
But that was then and the legacy of Republican policy has killed off ten million Republican voters since then, never to be replaced by our better read and informed (and less Aryan) youth. So it will happen, someday, and the day it becomes feasible, those two chumps are gone.
budkin
(6,691 posts)The pukes could have under Romney but those other a-holes will never retire under Obama. They would have to keel over.