Hillary Clinton, Supreme Court Nominee? White House Says 'No'

Source: Huffington Post

The White House pushed back on speculation that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton might be in the running to fill retiring Justice John Paul Stevens's seat on the Supreme Court.

White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said that President Obama "thinks Secretary Clinton is doing an excellent job as Secretary of State and wants her to remain in that position."

Earlier, Sen. Orrin Hatch said he's heard Secretary Clinton's name mentioned in connection with the Supreme Court vacancy brought about by the retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens.

Hatch didn't elaborate in an interview Monday. Appearing with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy on NBC's "Today" show, the Utah Republican said only, "I heard Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's name today and that would be an interesting person in the mix.". . .

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/12/hillary-clinton-supreme-c_n_533704.html

---

No. All due respect, but Jennifer Granholm is younger. She is the correct choice.

I think the fact she is a naturalized citizen would cause a political fire storm from the right.

They can't wait for this political opportunity.

Anyway, I understand she is no longer on the list.

She is brighter than all get out. Edited the civil rights review publication at Harvard, and as a sitting gov, is more than able to take on the Repukes who will grill her in her confirmation.

She is the choice. Go for it, Mr. President.

But, the White House won't risk giving the Republicans this talking point in the run up to the mid-terms.

Jennifer or Hillary. But what's with the picture of Jack Nicklaus? How bout' a pic of Kaline? You know the Tigers have the best record in baseball out of the gate.

That was for The Masters. But Al is the best. You don't even know what a role model he was to this kid who grew up without a Dad. Al never let anyone down. Ever. I will change my pic, and no knock at Jack in 1986.

Maxine Waters would be my favorite -- tho!!

HRC is DLC and corporate leadership within Dem Party!

Not good --

Barbara Boxer would be good -- I think.

Eleanor maybe and Barbara Boxer a yes. IMO

the pervert!



:evilgrin:

Here's a link to an article that lists the PROs & CONs of some of the talked about possible nominees:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100411/us-supreme-court-possible-nominees/

Of the ones listed in the above article link, in my opinion, Merrick Garland (1952) and Diane Wood (1950) are going to be out of the running due to age (also Hillary Clinton). I believe the our next Justice will be 55 years old or younger (born 1954 or after) so that the length of holding the seat will be extended as long as possible.

At this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_Supreme_Court_candidates
there is a long list of potential candidates (down the page where the map is) with their birth years listed.

Time will tell.

p.s. I'm still rooting for Harold Koh ;)

Stephens was the last one on the Court. I'm not sure that's a good thing, with all due respect.

Granholm. Period.

If Granholm was picked and confirmed, she would be the 7th Catholic member. Personally, religion isn't an issue so I hope Granholm is selected by Obama. She would do a great job.

Not with Popes so active these days in encouraging them to do his bidding!!

In general, I think it should be a FEMALE --

That is so young s/he will be on the court for 60 years and so liberal s/he is practically a communist. I mean it. We need hard, hard, hard left liberals on the court to counter act three decades of right wing court packing.

Regardless, I'm sick and tired with the "meme" that she's too old for it. She's 62 and could easily stay in the court for the next 25 years. If her mom is any indication, barring some unforeseen eventuality, she should live a long life.

;)

There are other possibly more qualified women in the world. Gee, Hillary didn't break the mold.