Does Souter's silence on hiring mean he's leaving? "It's getting late, even for Souter."

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The case of the missing law clerks is this spring's most-watched mystery at the Supreme Court.

It could be, to borrow a page from Sherlock Holmes, the court's dog that didn't bark, offering a clue as to the retirement plans of Justice David Souter. Or perhaps Souter, known for his wry humor, is having a little chuckle at our expense. He isn't saying, declining through a court spokeswoman to put the issue to rest.

Either way, eight justices are known to have hired the four law clerks who will work with them in the Supreme Court term that begins in October. Souter appears to be the lone holdout...

But one former senior government lawyer who declined to be named because he practices in front of the Supreme Court said, "It's getting late, even for Souter."

For the last three years, at least, the identities of Souter's clerks for the upcoming term have been known by now.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SCOTUS_IS_SOUTER_HIRING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

than next year, the President is still riding pretty high, and stands a better chance of getting a nominee through the Senate.

I remember specifically reading a story about Sandra Day O'Connor and the supposed fact that she'd told her clerks to start looking for new jobs, because she would be leaving soon.

That was in 2001. Her evil replacement was not confirmed until 2005.

However, I think she held off as long as she could after she saw what she helped to bring into power. Her Husband had not been well for sometime.

That's one of the reasons I love the future: sometimes, it really does play out the way someone expects it.

It's just never me who expects it.

Here's hoping Souter is only the first of, oh, eight or so to depart in the next six months.

The odds of getting someone as good are low (IMO).