Glenn Greenwald makes the case for Diane Wood as SC judge

[mehdi kiril]

The column is very lenthy, so i will only post a tiny excerpt:

GREENWALD (4-19-2010):
"The similarity between her jurisprudence and Justice Stevens' is striking and easy to document, thus ensuring that (at the very least) she will maintain the Court's balance; unlike a Kagan selection, there is no risk Wood will move the Court to the Right and, in some important respects, could very well do the opposite.

She has not refrained, due to careerism and personal ambition, from issuing principled rulings (even in dissent) that she knew could be used against her (such as the series of abortion rulings which are now being used to depict her -- falsely -- as some sort of pro-abortion extremist). That she graduated college and law school from the University of Texas (before clerking for Justice Harry Blackmun) will bring some much needed diversity to the Court; by all accounts, this background (along with her raising three children while piling up these accomplishments) causes her to bring a different perspective to the circumstances of individual litigants as compared to the typical Yale/Harvard federal judge or academician. As a result, her judicial record evinces a steadfast commitment to ensuring (rather than closing off) justice system access for ordinary Americans when the law permits it. I document these attributes below.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/19/wood/index.html

[meegbear]

1. I just read it and it's well worth the time ...

:party: WELCOME TO DU!! :party:

[mr_liberal]

2. Greenwald being for her may make her look too liberal;

thats not a good thing - and its probably not true either. I hope he shuts up about her now.

I actually thought she should have been the choice when Sotomayor was chosen. I still feel like Sotomayor was a lost opportunity and she will end up being a disappointment.

[Luminous Animal]

3. Did you advocate he shut up when he came to Sotomayor's defense over and over again?

[mr_liberal]

4. I didnt know he was for Sotomayor back then

had I known I would have disagreed with him . I was opposed to her being the nominee. I couldn't figure out what her philosophy was, and she didn't seem to me to be the kind of judge that could be a leader and influence others on the court. It seemed to me like she was being chosen more because she was Hispanic than that she was the right person for the job.

[Luminous Animal]

5. But did Greenwald's advocacy paint her as too liberal?

[mr_liberal]

6. I think it was different then

Obama had more political capital, it was his first pick, the party wasnt concerned about the midterms.... so he could have basically whoever he wanted.

I just hope it doesnt turn into a groundswell of support for Wood by the liberal blogoshere becuase that could really damage her. Thats what would concern me. If its just Greenwald alone then it probably wont have much impact.

[mehdi kiril]

7. Greenwald called her a "moderate-progressive compromise"

I don't think you read the article. Greenwald made clear that he favor other more liberal possibilities such as Koh and Pam Karlam, but they have no chance now. He also called Wood a moderate progressive, and compared Wood to the "public option" as opposed to "single payer" in an analogy.:

Just as the truly left-wing health care approach (a single-payer system) was eliminated from consideration before the process even began, so, too, have the truly left-wing candidates to replace Justice Stevens (Pam Karlan, Harold Koh) been ruled out as "not viable." As a result, the moderate-progressive compromises (i.e., the public option for health care and Diane Wood for Stevens' replacement) are falsely depicted as some sort of liberal extremism, merely because they're the least conservative options allowed to be considered.

[aikoaiko]

8. This is not surprising considering his anti-Elena Kagan piece.