irateplatypus

I feel the most lasting impact of yesterday's election is the potential implications it could have on the Supreme court (as well as other federal courts). We all know of Chief Justice Rehnquist's health problems and that a new justice hasn't been appointed for 12 years. The high courts are ripe with the opportunity for replacements over the next four years.

Besides the President's re-election and so many potential places on the bench for his nominees... the Senate Republicans have extended their majority making finding enough Democrats to break a filibuster much easier (in the senate you need 60 people to break a filibuster).

So... we have a semi-conservative President serving at a time when many seats might open on the federal benches with a legislature that has a bigger majority than in the years past. It sounds as if the makeup of the federal courts may be dramatically altered over the next few years.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

daswig

and that may well be a good thing.

alansmithee

That was one of my primary reasons for supporting Bush. I feel any judge he appoints is more likely to stick to enforcing, not rewriting, laws.

flstf

Supreme Court justices sometimes go their own way after they have the lifetime position. Some very liberal justices were nominated by Republicans in the past.

alansmithee

I know, I think Souter is one of them. Wasn't he nominated by Bush Sr. r Regan? Or am I thinking of Breyer?

But I can't think of any justice appointed by a Democrat that turned out to be conservative.

hannukah harry

i really feel that this statement is rather ignorant. there's a big difference between a judge making a law and a judge saying that since there is no law making it illegal, it is legal until otherwise engaged. that's not being an activist, that's following the law. our country is largely based on the idea that if something isn't in the constitution, and hasn't been legislated at the state or local level, then it it's legal to do. so don't blame the judge, blame the people who wrote their marriage law without regards to gender. (because i'm sure that's what you were referring to).

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

maleficent

Here's the current court and who nominated them:

William H. Rehnquist, Nixon
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Clinton
John Paul Stevens, Ford
Stephen Breyer, Ford
Sandra Day O'Connor,Reagan
Antonin Scalia, Reagan
Anthony M. Kennedy,Reagan
David Hackett Souter, Bush
Clarence Thomas,Bush

__________________

adam

All sorts of fearful things may happen, e.g., overturning Roe v. Wade. Should be an "exciting" decade as the Republicans pay off the Evangelicals.

Stompy

I don't think they could overturn Roe vs. Wade. Maybe they can... but it was already ruled upon, you'd think there would have to be a big process that it would go through.

Not to mention, do you realize the amount of shit they would get for that? There would be massive demonstrations and all it would accomplish is creation of underground clinics and "do it yourself" kits.

There's dire consequences to messing with something set in stone like that, but, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened.

__________________
I love lamp.

daswig

Umm....you're kidding, right?

/shakes his head sadly

Stompy

Umm, no, I'm not.

Why don't you put a bit more thought into your post instead of making it a guessing game that I have to reply to?

There's nothing to "shake your head sadly" about, either. If you have something informative to post, post it. Don't sit there and mock others like an ass.

__________________
I love lamp.

irateplatypus

i don't think roe vs wade has a chance of falling no matter the supreme court appointments.

however, i do think that much needed restrictions such as a partial birth ban and parental notification would have an excellent chance of being accepted by the court.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Stompy

Partial birth ban I could see... parental notification, not so much. Seems like an invasion of privacy to me (and the very reason why that whole idea doesn't sound too good!)

__________________
I love lamp.

tecoyah

It seems it is time to REMIND certain members of our policy on civility and respect

Consider this your....Friendly.....reminder

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Stompy

Sorry, but half-assed posts are annoying.

__________________
I love lamp.

tecoyah

Not directed at just you

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

skinnymofo

i voted for kerry for the exact opposite reason. I feel a moderate or slightly liberal justice is better than overly conservative ones, though i would prefer straight moderate for any politition