Wednesday
June 29, 2005
BUSH'S PICK COULD BE LIKE "LIGHTNING STRIKING:"
Jan Crawford Greenburg continues to shine with another
must read article about the White House's preparation for
an impending vacancy on the Supreme Court. Greenburg reports:
The
White House also has had discussions with four leading conservatives
about how best to support the nominee and marshal him through
the confirmation process, sources said. That group comprises
[Edwin] Meese, [C. Boyden] Gray, Jay Sekulow, who frequently
argues before the Supreme Court and is chief counsel for the
legal group American Center for Law & Justice, and Leonard
Leo, who leads the Federalist Society, an organization of conservative
lawyers.
On
Friday, Card, Rove and Miers met with the four at the White
House. The conversation focused exclusively on the process,
sources said, and not on any specific nominee. The outside advisers
support all of the federal judges on the short list, sources
said, although there is less enthusiasm for tapping the more
moderate Gonzales to take Rehnquist's place....
"Does
he care enough that that would stop him?" the official
asked of whether Bush would nominate Gonzales over conservative
opposition. "It would be a benefit to the party over a
long period of time, and it would be historic."
Of
Bush's decision, he said: "It will be a very personal choice."
The
official said the White House has seriously considered a handful
of federal judges, including J. Michael Luttig and J. Harvie
Wilkinson, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
based in Richmond, Va.; John Roberts, of the Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit; Samuel Alito, of the Philadelphia-based
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit; and Michael McConnell,
of the Denver-based Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.
Sources
close to the White House said Luttig, Roberts and Alito have
emerged as the leading contenders.
But
the official cautioned that all are highly regarded and remain
in contention, and that Bush's choice at this point could be
like "lightning striking."
Let's put
this information into the context of what we know about this president.
We know he wants to appoint a true conservative justice, and the
final set of mystifying Supreme Court decisions only increases
the pressure that Bush pick someone with unimpeachable credentials
who is considered "Souter proof." We also know, as evidenced
by Social Security and the dressing down given to Majority Leader
Frist over the Bolton nomination last week to cite just two examples,
this is a president who doesn't shy away from a political fight.
I happen
to believe Bush does harbor a desire to appoint the first Hispanic
to the Court. Furthermore, I think Bush and his fellow Republicans
relish the idea (not to mention the future electoral implications)
of putting Democrats in the position of using the filibuster to
block such an historic appointment under what will be intense
public exposure.
If Bush is
looking for a Hispanic but a Gonzales nomination is untenable,
Emilio Garza is the next most likely choice, especially if Bush
is looking to fill the Chief Justice spot directly. One name that
hasn't been mentioned very frequently, however, is Miguel Estrada.
It's certainly a long shot scenario, but I would be surprised
if there hasn't been some discussion of elevating either Scalia
or Thomas to Chief Justice and nominating Estrada for Associate.
Now that would be some lightning strike. - T. Bevan 9:05
am Link | Email
| Send
To A Friend
Monday
June 27, 2005
COUNTDOWN TO THE SUPREME FIGHT: For the last couple of
weeks we've been conducting an informal survey of some of the
top Supreme Court watchers and legal minds in the country to get
their impressions on the impending nomination battle. We asked
three simple questions based on the most likely scenario of a
Rehnquist retirement:
Question
1: If Chief Justice Rehnquist steps down, will President Bush
nominate someone not currently on the Court to replace him or
will he seek to elevate one of the sitting Associate Justices?
Question
2: Assuming President Bush opts to nominate someone not currently
on the Court, please list the names of the top three candidates
you feel would be most likely to be nominated for Chief Justice
(in order of likelihood).
Question
3: If President Bush decides to nominate a current member of
the Court for Chief Justice, who will he choose? Also, please
list the names of the top three candidates you feel would be
most likely to be nominated to fill the resulting vacancy of
Associate Justice (in order of likelihood).
Seventy percent
(70%) of those surveyed thought President Bush would nominate
someone new for the position of Chief Justice as opposed to elevating
a current member of the Court. Among those mentioned as most likely
nominees for position of Chief Justice, J.
Michael Luttig finished at the top of the list just barely
ahead of John C. Roberts.
Michael W. McConnell
came in a very close third and Alberto
Gonzalez and Emilio
Garza tied for a distant fourth place. J.
Harvie Wilkinson finished in fifth place and Samuel
Alito, Jr. brought up the rear.
When forced
to consider who Bush might choose to elevate off the current Court,
eighty percent (80%) responded Anthony Scalia and twenty percent
(20%) said Clarence Thomas. The list of those mentioned to fill
the resulting Associate Justice vacancy was almost identical to
that of Chief Justice, suggesting the decision of whether to elevate
a current member of the court to Chief Justice will have little
to no impact on who Bush ends up nominating for the Court.
Combining
responses from questions two and three we get the following results:
1)
J. Michael Luttig
2) John C. Roberts
3) Michael W. McConnell
4) Alberto Gonzales
5) Emilio Garza
6) J. Harvie Wilkinson
7) Samuel Alito, Jr.
8) Janice Rogers Brown
This seems
to fit well within current conventional wisdom. Luttig and Roberts
are frequently cited as top two prospects under consideration
by the White House: both are young and known to be solidly conservative.
McConnell is also highly respected with good conservative credentials,
though he seems to come across as everyone's favorite second choice.
Now for a
couple of caveats. First, our survey was conducted with the assurance
of complete confidentiality. Suffice it to say that respondents
include distinguished professors and scholars from the top law
schools around the country, Supreme Court reporters from some
of the largest and most well respected media outlets, and some
notable private practice attorneys. Because we were trying to
get the opinions of such an elite group, however, our sample size
is understandably small.
Second, most
of the surveys were conducted prior to the buzz of a possible
O'Connor retirement instead of Rehnquist. Obviously, the dynamics
of a nomination would change dramatically if this were to occur.
I'll be writing
more on my own thoughts about who Bush will nominate later this
week. In the meantime, if you haven't already bookmarked our RCP
Supreme Court Nomination page, I suggest you do it soon to
stay up to date with all the news and buzz on what is sure to
be one of the biggest political fights of the year. -
T. Bevan 9:05 am Link
| Email | Send
To A Friend
