Hatch Predicts Nominee Coming Soon - Perhaps as soon as this weekend.

[jefferson_dem]

:popcorn:

Hatch Predicts Nominee Coming Soon
By Seth Stern | May 4, 2009 6:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

After speaking with the president on the phone Monday, Orrin G. Hatch predicted a replacement for Justice David H. Souter on the Supreme Court could be named as soon as this weekend.

"I'd be surprised if it went beyond this week," said Hatch, a Utah Republican and Senate Judiciary Committee member.

Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said President Obama filled him in on when he was planning to announce a nominee but would not comment publicly on the time frame. "I'll let the president speak for himself," said Leahy, who intends to make his own recommendations to the president when they sit down and talk in person.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/legal_beat/2009/05/hatch-predicts-nominee-coming.html

[SemiCharmedQuark]

1. I saw him on Tweety. He's such a smarmy bastard. He was arguing that Brown V. Board represented

the conservative view of judicial interpretation and not "empathy".

[dflprincess]

14. There were some who slammed "activist" judges after that decision

Many decisions of the Warren Court elicited that response (along with calls for Warren's impeachment).

[SemiCharmedQuark]

16. Yeah, Hatch was trying to say that *NOBODY* disagreed with Brown v. Board.

[tekisui]

2. Let's have it. I am ready for a new Liberal Justice!

[blueclown]

3. Souter won't retire until after the term is over in June

And we don't need a justice for quite a few months.

There is no rush. President Obama should be taking his time on this pick, and ignoring the radical right's calls.

[Aloha Spirit]

5. Well, Obama's had a team working on supreme court nominations since at least December, so

I'm not sure this is a rush for them.
It's possible Obama wants to put the nomination out quickly before the Republicans get organized, ya know?

[ShadowLiberal]

12. Yeah, Obama even had a meeting on this the day before Souter's announcement

And like you said, Obama had his people start to get to work researching some potential nominees, and finding other potential nominees, as early as December. He's been readying for this for several months.

[librechik]

4. OMG. I hope Obama ignores his advice!

Clinton listened to him too much.

He's the devil in a mormon suit.

[Happyhippychick]

6. Anita Hill baby!!!

[jwirr]

10. Absolutely - just to keep Thomas in line. That would be so funny.

[StevieM]

19. She's certainly more qualified than Clarence Thomas. But, admittedly, that's not saying much (eom)

[TankLV]

7. Hey - they believe in the fucking RAPTURE - so I'll treat is as it deserves...

with utter CONTEMPT, SCORN, RIDICULE, and then IGNORE it like all his other fucking IDIOTIC STATEMENTS!!!

[Thrill]

8. You really think Obama cares what Hatch says? This isn't policy. This is a Supreme Court justice

No President gives a flying fuck what the other party thinks when it comes to this.

[liberalpragmatist]

9. I'd be pretty stunned by that...

... but who knows. Obama's team tends to be pretty on-the-ball.

I'm pulling for a non-judge, but we'll see if that happens. Most of the speculation is about Sonia Sotomayor.

[Cha]

11. Good ol' Leahy..

"I'll let the president speak for himself". As opposed to orrin hatch who presumes to know it all.:silly:

[polichick]

13. I hope Obama's choice makes Hatch pee his pants! :)

[Thrill]

15. If its coming that soon, that means its Elena Kagan.

Because shes already been vetted. Heck even Hatch voted Yes on her.

[Hieronymus]

18. Cool

[sohndrsmith]

17. I watched Hatch on Hardball, too - apparently he hasn't seen/read Obama's statement...

I was stunned that while he seemed somewhat "pacified" by Obama's personal call with him, he was still equating Obama's use of the word "empathy" with some dangerous scheme for a SCJ to insert his/her (I paraphrase) "personal and political views" into the judicial process, and he still seems convinced this means only one thing: an activist judge (who likely won't agree with Sen. Hatch on much - hence his trepidation).

His repeating these doubts of politics and personal agenda infiltrating the process made me go back and read the transcript of Obama's actual statement on this (a link to the full statement is below).

I turned Obama's statement into a list (nearly verbatim with only 1 or 2 minor cosmetic alterations:

OBAMA'S SC SELECTION CRITERIA:
-- sharp and intelligent mind
-- a record of excellence and integrity
-- understands justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a case book
-- understands it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of peoples lives
-- the quality of empathy, understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles
essential for arriving at just decisions and outcomes
-- dedicated to the rule of law
-- honors our constitutional traditions
-- respects the integrity of the judicial process and appropriate limits of the judicial role
-- shares (Obama's) respect for constitutional values - and brings a thoughtful understanding
of how to apply them in our time

As part of the decision-making process, (Obama) will consult with members in both parties across
the political spectrum.
______

There is nothing (I can see) that would make anyone get the impression that Obama's priority was to select someone on the basis of personal views or political agendas... I guess I missed what Sen. Hatch heard, because I don't see it here.
Full transcript:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/us/politics/01souter.text.html?_r=1