Judicial Nomination Wishful Thinking

[elfs]

Although I am probably not at all going to be correct, if Bush wanted someone "in the Roberts mode," he could do no better than Richard Posner or Alex Kozinski. Those two deserve that seat in a way Gonzales or Meiers never could.

If intellectual rigor is what the court needs, it couldn't do better than those two. Unfortunately, Posner's 66, but he's still an unbelievably prolific writer. Kozinski's paper trail is fascinating stuff.

Naaah. Who am I kidding? We're going to get another Souter.

Comments

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

Do I recall correctly that David Souter backfired on the president that appointed him?

Could we get lucky and get somebody that would do the same (i.e. set Roe v. Wade in stone and defend the Constitution against all comers, even Dubya's goons)?

[elfs.livejournal.com]

Sort-of. Souter's presence is still somewhat enigmatic. It seems that he's mostly a stare decisis guy and unwilling to do anything really interesting.

[fallenpegasus]

"set Roe V Wade in stone" and "defend the Constitution against all comers" are not congruant. RvW may be useful social policy, but it was then and remains today crappy constitutional law.

And by "defend the Constitution against all comers", do you mean "the text as it's written", or do you mean "the body of precident we call Constitutional Law, especially the stuff penned by the Warren Court and by the FDR New Deal Court" (who are the folks who actually gave us the Kelo Decision (the recent Kelo case did not make new law, it just upheld crap that dates back to Saint FDR, and to the Gilded Age Progressives before him.))