Poll: favorite current Supreme Court justice

[EatTheRich]

People can pretend the justices aren't political but there's no question they are.

My vote goes to Sonia Sotomayor for being warier than the others about enhancing the power of ANY branch of government including her own and for being less friendly to business and theocratic interests.

 

[fairsheet]

People can pretend the justices aren't political but there's no question they are.

My vote goes to Sonia Sotomayor for being warier than the others about enhancing the power of ANY branch of government including her own and for being less friendly to business and theocratic interests.

I'm surprised when I hear people "whisper" about and bemoan the fact that The Supreme Court is political. Why the hell do these people think our founders put electeds in charge of both nominating, advising, and consenting to Justices?

 

[Jen]

Clarence Thomas.
I trust that his vote will be well thought through and just and that it agrees with my own thought process.
I cannot say the same for all of the justices (Roberts comes to mind) who might be guilty of compromising their beliefs.
The process of some other justices (Ruth Bader Ginsberg comes to mind) may be well thought through, but the thought process of those justices does not run parallel with my own.
So Thomas gets my vote.

 

[EatTheRich]

My out-on-a-limb prediction: if we get a lot more votes on here, the 'left' vote will be divided with a plurality going to Ginsburg; the center will be divided, coalescing to a limited extent around either Kennedy or Roberts; but Thomas will far outpoll Alito, Scalia or anyone else on the right and will be the big favorite overall.

 

[fairsheet]

I know I'm a little late here, but I decided to go with Ginsburg. C'mon...which other of 'em had the guts to admit that they all go to those Sotus with a nip onboard?

 

[EatTheRich]

I know I'm a little late here, but I decided to go with Ginsburg. C'mon...which other of 'em had the guts to admit that they all go to those Sotus with a nip onboard?

I assumed (since there were only 3 votes and 3 posters here for a while) that you were the one who voted for Roberts. And I was a little surprised, but not so much that I couldn't see it happening.

Looks like I was wrong about the distribution of the vote so far.

 

[fairsheet]

I assumed (since there were only 3 votes and 3 posters here for a while) that you were the one who voted for Roberts. And I was a little surprised, but not so much that I couldn't see it happening.

Looks like I was wrong about the distribution of the vote so far.

Your suggestion that I voted for Roberts, pains me.

 

[EatTheRich]

Your suggestion that I voted for Roberts, pains me.

I apologize.

 

[fairsheet]

I apologize.

For what it's worth, I've never been what you'd call an advocate for Roberts. But, when he was nominated, I may've spoken out against going over the top to reject him. It was my hope that he'd be turning a whole lot of what were formally 5-4 decisions into at least 7-2 decisions. Like it or not, the Supreme Court IS a political body. But, it's not good for it to be so blatant about it.

BTW, my "hope" has proven itself a will-o-the-wisp.

 

[EatTheRich]

For what it's worth, I've never been what you'd call an advocate for Roberts. But, when he was nominated, I may've spoken out against going over the top to reject him. It was my hope that he'd be turning a whole lot of what were formally 5-4 decisions into at least 7-2 decisions. Like it or not, the Supreme Court IS a political body. But, it's not good for it to be so blatant about it.

BTW, my "hope" has proven itself a will-o-the-wisp.

I got caught up in the wave of criticism of Harriet Miers when she was nominated. I don't really know enough to speak to her competence relative to that of any given member of the Court today. However, on purely political grounds, I didn't realize until afterward that it was mostly the right trying to scuttle her nomination so that they could get a more ideological candidate, like Alito, in there instead.

 

[fairsheet]

I got caught up in the wave of criticism of Harriet Miers when she was nominated. I don't really know enough to speak to her competence relative to that of any given member of the Court today. However, on purely political grounds, I didn't realize until afterward that it was mostly the right trying to scuttle her nomination so that they could get a more ideological candidate, like Alito, in there instead.

I sympathized with Miers from the git go. She wasn't really qualified for the position, so it would've been a heckuva lot more respectful of Bush to not nominate her than to nominate her. Funny.....GHWB's Thomas wasn't qualified either. I wonder what that tells us about the Bush family's perspective?

A coupla weeks ago, I happened across a fascinating panel discussion on PBS, that I'm guessing was from around 35-40 years ago. It was MC'd by Charles Ogletree and included about a dozen erudites of that time, to include Scalia.

The subject was a theoretical capital case. To a lesser or greater degree, every member struggled to reconcile his/her personal feelings, with their understanding of the constitutional law. Scalia stood out even then, for having LESS trouble with this than anyone else. Even then, Scalia seemed convinced that his personal opinion was superior to the law.