Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the court's oldest member and leader of its liberal bloc, he is retiring. President Barack Obama now has his second high court opening to fill.

Stevens said Friday he will step down when the court finishes its work for the summer in late June or early July. He said he hopes his successor is confirmed "well in advance of the commencement of the court's next term."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/09/AR2010040902312.html?wpisrc=nl_natlalert

Wonderful. I wonder how long this will take?

This is going to be a confirmation process for the ages. Chaos will ensue.

Conservatives are going to have a meltdown with Obama getting to appoint another justice.

cbus4life wrote: This is going to be a confirmation process for the ages. Chaos will ensue.

Conservatives are going to have a meltdown with Obama getting to appoint another justice.

Maybe...not a hill worth dying on, IMO since Bam's not likely to find someone more liberal than Stevens anyway.

I think they'll do the same thing that they did to that wise latina chick...tweak her enough to let her know they're in the room, but then go ahead and let it go.

If anyone could find someone more liberal than Stevens, it would be Obama.

cbus4life wrote: If anyone could find someone more liberal than Stevens, it would be Obama.

I see what you did there.

As long as he doesn't nominate a flame thrower he will have no problem getting someone confirmed. Stevens is a liberal, and will be replaced with a liberal. It does nothing to alter the balance of the court. The same goes for Ginsburg, who may not have all that much longer on the bench as well.

Look for BHO to nominate someone very young though. Bush made sure to put 2 very young guys on the bench so as to keep the Conservative lean of the court going for long into the foreseeable future. His father did the same thing with Thomas. Republicans are far more prudent about that sort of thing, but the Democrats have caught on at this point I think that nominating anyone older than 55 is a non-starter.

The titanic battle to end all battles will come when a Conservative Justice leaves the court either voluntarily, or because of a medical condition/ Death.

That would be the first chance liberals would have to take back the 5-4 majority, as right now the conservative block runs the court. It will probably be at least a decade before that becomes an issue though.

You've got to admire Justice Stevens in a weird way though because he was holding on during the Bush years to stay on the court with the hopes of seeing a Democrat President elected to replace him so as to avoid the Conservative block getting a 6th justice and essentially guaranteeing a couple of generation stranglehold on the court.

fish82 wrote:

cbus4life wrote: This is going to be a confirmation process for the ages. Chaos will ensue.

Conservatives are going to have a meltdown with Obama getting to appoint another justice.

Maybe...not a hill worth dying on, IMO since Bam's not likely to find someone more liberal than Stevens anyway.

I think they'll do the same thing that they did to that wise latina chick...tweak her enough to let her know they're in the room, but then go ahead and let it go.

This. I could see the GOP actually using this. "Look how fast we confirmed a liberal justice, we reach across the aisle... see?!"

LJ wrote:

fish82 wrote:

cbus4life wrote: This is going to be a confirmation process for the ages. Chaos will ensue.

Conservatives are going to have a meltdown with Obama getting to appoint another justice.

Maybe...not a hill worth dying on, IMO since Bam's not likely to find someone more liberal than Stevens anyway.

I think they'll do the same thing that they did to that wise latina chick...tweak her enough to let her know they're in the room, but then go ahead and let it go.

This. I could see the GOP actually using this. "Look how fast we confirmed a liberal justice, we reach across the aisle... see?!"

No, I think they play the bipartisanship card on the START (Prague) Treaty.
I see them holding up the nominee in committee for a while and then threatening a filibuster, before approval.

Wouldn't it be delicious if BHO nominated his wife.... Or Hillary

Devils Advocate wrote: Wouldn't it be delicious if BHO nominated his wife.... Or Hillary

Harriet Miers redux...not likely.

Still, The nation would look like a remake of "Scanners"

Obama may very likely appoint another woman. He was very close to appointing Diane Wood or Elena Kagan the last go around. Both are liberal and support women's rights. As noted above Stevens championed liberal causes so it is a wash as far as the Court make-up. In other positive news Kagan would likely improve the Court's softball team

Kagan will be the nominee. She's been rumored to be so for a long time. A good friend is clerking for Wood right now, though, so for his sake, I hope she gets the nomination.

Either is more than qualified and should get through, absent grandstanding antics on behalf of Repubs. Though, with the way Obama acted for Bush's nominations, it would probably serve him right.

Yep... The chicken might be commin home to roost

If we are going to have another liberal women on the Supreme Court, could we get one that is a little easier on the eyes?

majorspark wrote: If we are going to have another liberal women on the Supreme Court, could we get one that is a little easier on the eyes?

Good luck with that.

Sure... it should also be the criteria for the 1st female POTUS. If they ain't worth Fuckin... They ain't qualified.

This is an old one that has been around about the difference between Conservative v. Liberal women

It doesn't matter who Obama nominates, he/she will be confirmed. All of you got excited when Sotomayor was nominated and she sailed through. It will be no different this time. The Republicans will rattle their sabres and try to give the appearance of holding up the confirmation, but they won't actually do it and the nominee will be confirmed.

I hope he does choose someone who is moderate or just left of center. I see no problem with replacing Stevens with a judge that has the same philosophy as Stevens.

I do see the committee hearing being brutal depending on who he chooses. However, once they get past that, I see them being confirmed. The problem is I can see it being held up for months.

Also, the Senate is now going to be insanely busy-START Treaty, SC nominee, budget, other confirmations (still a bunch out there), and regular committee hearings.

I see Obama nominating a moderate but committed liberal. If he were to go with a radical like Sunstein to the court who has made anti-first amendment statements among other issues, he'll get very strong opposition by not just republicans but conservative democrats.

I don't think it's fair to label Sunstein a radical. He's admittedly more libertarian than most of the other potential nominees (and probably too controversial to be confirmed), but he's by no means a radical.

Based on everything I have read Kagan seems to be the likely choice at this point. She is young (only 49) and not a flame thrower, and while no one he nominates will be liked by Republicans she is considered tolerable to them for the most part.

Merrick Garland is the one Republicans would supposedly be happiest with, which means he will be held back until next year when Ginsburg retires and Obama has smaller majorities in Congress. Being the least liberal of the group being talked about would make him easiest to confirm in a closely divided Senate in 2011.

I think Diane Wood's ship has sailed. She is the one many of the liberal groups are supporting, which is probably a big strike against her. The fact she turns 60 this year also really hurts her, because if Obama is going to go with someone in that age range it will be Garland who would be an easy confirmation.

The Republicans will oppose anyone Obama nominates. I see a big fight brewing on the horizon.

FairwoodKing wrote: The Republicans will oppose anyone Obama nominates. I see a big fight brewing on the horizon.

Just like the Democrats oppose anyone a Republican President nominates. It's pure politics, same as usual.