The Obama Judiciary

[Tex]

I really don't understand why Obama's potential influence hasn't gotten more attention this cycle. He has the potential to pick probably 2-4 of the next SCOTUS judges, to say nothing of lower federal courts. This is usually a winning issue for conservatives.

Steven Calabresi has an article describing a possible picture of the Obama judiciary:

- a federal constitutional right to welfare
- a federal constitutional mandate of affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent
- a right for government-financed abortions through the third trimester of pregnancy
- the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants
- ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors
- approval of huge punitive damage awards, like those imposed against tobacco companies, against many legitimate businesses such as those selling fattening food

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1225...html#printMode

[BarbaraGordon]

you really think Obama will appoint activists who will forward his agenda from the bench?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I really don't understand why Obama's potential influence hasn't gotten more attention this cycle. He has the potential to pick probably 2-4 of the next SCOTUS judges, to say nothing of lower federal courts. This is usually a winning issue for conservatives.

Steven Calabresi has an article describing a possible picture of the Obama judiciary:

- a federal constitutional right to welfare
- a federal constitutional mandate of affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent
- a right for government-financed abortions through the third trimester of pregnancy
- the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants
- ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors
- approval of huge punitive damage awards, like those imposed against tobacco companies, against many legitimate businesses such as those selling fattening food

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1225...html#printMode

Don't forget the almost certain requirement that everyone wear red and learn Russian.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Don't forget the almost certain requirement that everyone wear red and learn Russian.

I heard something about the boyscouts becoming a movement to further gay pride.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

you really think Obama will appoint activists who will forward his agenda from the bench?

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I heard something about the boyscouts becoming a movement to further gay pride.

We were one vote away from forcing the Boy Scouts to permit gay scoutmasters. You tell me.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

We were one vote away from forcing the Boy Scouts to permit gay scoutmasters. You tell me.

And then requiring those scoutmasters to have sex with the scouts. I know! Can you believe it?

I think Obama has already caught the gay. Is there no cure?

[Ma'ake]

Seriously, which conservative judges are likely to retire?

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Seriously, which conservative judges are likely to retire?

For conservative voters, Ma-ake, it doesn't matter which Justice retires. It's about his replacement.

Assume Obama is president.

Now say a liberal retires. With Obama as president you're missing out on the chance to replace the liberal with a conservative and create a conservative court.

If a conservative retires, you risk losing a conservative voice and creating a liberal court.

If Kennedy retires, you risk losing your only swing vote and creating a liberal court.

This is, of course, assuming that Obama appoints liberals, which does not seem entirely unreasonable.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

And then requiring those scoutmasters to have sex with the scouts. I know! Can you believe it?

I think Obama has already caught the gay. Is there no cure?

Dale is fortunate you were not arguing the case for him, or he would've lost 9-0 instead of 5-4.

[Ma'ake]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

For conservative voters, Ma-ake, it doesn't matter which Justice retires. It's about his replacement.

Assume Obama is president.

Now say a liberal retires. With Obama as president you're missing out on the chance to replace the liberal with a conservative and create a conservative court.

If a conservative retires, you risk losing a conservative voice and creating a liberal court.

If Kennedy retires, you risk losing your only swing vote and creating a liberal court.

This is, of course, assuming that Obama appoints liberals, which does not seem entirely unreasonable.

So if Stevens retires (fairly likely, he's been hanging on, patiently), Obama appoints a liberal, no real change in the makeup of the court, right? The big change from a conservative point of view is if Kennedy or one of the Cons quits or dies. Otherwise, why would they be bitching? Because the train to stack the court with right wing ideologues is slowed?