Obama's Scalia Replacement The Poll

Might want to add a few more to that list.

I hate you

I love how the wikipedia article lists their birthyear, no use hiding the 'how many years we get out of this workhorse' side of this

birth year is two words

I'm not gonna pretend I know anything about most of these names aside from those who've been part of the administration already and governors like Patrick and Granholm and otherwise national newsmakers like Harris, but Sri seems like potentially the easiest nominee to get through undamaged and the path of least resistance seems like the administration's gameplan in these matters.

Harris should go to the senate imo - altho really theres no safer seat

No one ever gets my Teenage Jesus joke about Loretta Lynch, but I might still vote for her.

Pretty sure, based on what I've read, both Deval Patrick and Kamala Harris are eyeing presidential runs in the not too distant future, so giving that up to serve on the court seems unlikely.

don't know most of these people what i know of liu is pretty great, but he had a pretty rough appellate confirmation process (that ultimately was unsuccessful) and iirc has got a pretty sweet gig as a justice on the cali supreme court, so i'd guess he's out. diane wood was reportedly pretty close to being nominated for each of obama's other two appointments, and is probably the consensus progressive pick. but it'll all depend on what route obama wants to go with this -- not sure if he wants a big fight during the election year. harold koh -- i used to love his writings bashing the bush administration, and there's no doubt he'd be a fantastic justice, though some of his work in the obama administration was pretty disappointing

honestly picking literally anyone off the street would be an improvement over scalia, though part of me hopes he somehow manages to get someone with a strong progressive record through

John Hodgman

write-in vote for "a grapefruit"

Buca di Beppo

My office and one officemate in particular are going to be insufferable on Tuesday.

just tell them Drudge Report says he's not actually dead, that'll stifle em for another day or so

Reading Charlie Savage's Power Wars killed any of my interest in Koh.

I seriously might just close my door all day and put up a sign that says "NO, I do NOT want to nerd out about possible Scalia replacements."

Will be Srinivasan; he will get through; he will be pro-corporate rights and lousy on criminal procedure.

Lousy = pro-cop, I hasten to add.

as long as there is choice in Waterworld

Reading more on Srinivasan I am a little dubious that it'll be him as he's already run into some opposition from unions when his name was bandied about and I'm not sure he's done anything on the District Court to mollify their concerns. My guess is that Obama tries to find someone a little more palatable to the left. Harris would honestly be perfect (even if I cannot quite shake "oh that was Willie Brown's ex-girlfriend" when I hear her name I imagine that says more about my limitations) but with a waiting senate and the possibility of even greater electoral rewards my guess is that she passes.

Hey what about Ted Cruz? I mean, unbelievably awful pick, sure, but don't you want to see him argue against his own nomination?

I think this accurately describes the frame - http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/how-the-politics-of-the-next-nomination-will-pay-out/#more-238336.

The opposition has chosen to make this all about politics and so while the Potus will certainly pick a qualified candidate (knowing that they are likely to be rejected at least as an initial matter), the (identity-)political effect of their obstruction/rejection is going to be front and center. Goldstein is right that the (initial) nominee is more likely than not going to be a member of a racial/ethnic minority group and/or a woman, preferably with recent Senate approval and/or other ties/vetting that would make them more difficult to slow-walk or pretend that there's some non-identity factor to their opposition. Goldstein ignores, however, a more granular political factor - ideally, given the importance of our politics' ridiculous division into the semi-arbitrary geographic boxes we call states, the nominee might also have an impact on one or more of them that are important in the electoral college and/or to Senatorial control. Consideration may also be given to the politics of the primary, with sensitivity to the possibility that a nominee could create a wedge issue between Clinton and Sanders, positively or negatively, though Sanders would have to be very careful not to be seen as siding with the GOP obstructionists here.

Goldstein may well be right that Obama will pick an African-American woman and that that woman will be Loretta Lynch. I'm not so sure, though, for several reasons. One, I think anyone associated with the President is at least somewhat unlikely as a political matter (though the recency of her service may temper that concern). Two, I think Goldstein at least slightly overestimates the extent to which Obama regards advancing African-American representation as either key to his legacy or important to this pick in particular (though I could certainly be wrong). Three, he certainly underestimates the extent to which Sotomayor, a Puerto Rican, is representative of "hispanics" (though his focus elsewhere may reflect his estimation of the potential hispanic nominees, not to mention the fact that they would maintain the 2/3 Catholic majority on the Court). And fourth, he doesn't reckon sufficiently with the potential political significance of an Asian appointee or the broader use of this fight to illustrate that it's GOP obstructionism that is the problem with Washington.

Here is my short list of potential nominees in addition to Lynch:
- Jane Kelly - already approved to the appellate bench by Cruz, McConnell, Rubio, and fellow Iowan and Judiciary Committee Chair Grassley, to whom she is close, she would be harder to attack (despite being Obama's HLS classmate) for not just those reasons but but also as a victim of a violent assault. Her unusually swingy state partially neighbors another (Wisconsin) that has almost swung and is the site of one of the likelier Democratic Senate pickups this year, and she would create issues for not just Ron Johnson there but probably Kelly Ayotte in NH (not that a male nominee wouldn't) and maybe her other fellow Iowan Joni Ernst, among others.
- Amy Klobuchar - a well-liked and media-trained Minnesota-Nice (and IA/WI-neighboring) member of the Judiciary Committee, the obstruction of whom might make her colleagues (including all 6 GOP women) look even worse, even if her political orientation is a complicating factor
- Sri Srinivasan - already approved by Cruz/Grassley/McConnell/Rubio, and whose Obama admin (and, earlier, Gore campaign) role might be blunted by his prominent corporate law firm representations (though those might create a political issue on the left, as mentioned) and clerkships for Sandra Day O'Connor and a leading conservative appellate court judge (whose inputs could be important). While he lacks important geographical ties, the Indian-American vote is significant in Virginia, perhaps among other states, which fellow Indian-American and coastal Southeastern Nikki Haley could threaten to put into play if selected as the Republican Vice Presidential nominee (which makes her attempted-king-making choice between Bush, towards whom she probably leans, Kasich, and Rubio this week a high-stakes one on which she may punt).

Some people I think are prominent possibles, but doubt will be nominated, at least in the first instance:
- Just about any white man, e.g. Merrick Garland or David Barron (and including Jews or Italian-Americans like Don Verrilli, though those might be fun politically too), though some of these have been reported to be on the short list, so we'll see
- Paul Watford - an African-American Federal appellate judge from L.A. who clerked for both Ginsburg and a leading conservative appellate Judge (also with some conservative academic supporters) before becoming a corporate law firm partner, and was approved by the Democratic Senate in 2012 without the support of most Republicans including Grassley, McConnell and Rubio would be a harder sell than Srinivasan or Lynch, and any political upside from the opposition would probably be smaller than that from a Wilkins or Patrick, blunted by his low profile, apolitical, and "establishment" orientation, as well as, perhaps, his light skin and mild affect. I think he's likeliest to be nominated, if at all, (by HRC) to succeed RBG when she leaves the bench, though he too is a frequent short-list name.
- Pat Millett - a white D.C. appellate judge approved on a mostly party-line vote in 2013 during intense debate over the filibuster seems unlikely from a political perspective as compared to Lynch), even with military ties, though her connection to resident (No)VA and native ME, while of uncertain strength, is not without electoral significance, in particular for Susan Collins and Kelly Ayotte.
- Kamala Harris - famously a three-fer as an African/Indian-American woman but, as per Goldstein, she appears to be cruising to Barbara Boxer's Senate seat and I'm skeptical she'd want to turn attention from for a nomination unlikely to succeed in part because she strikes me as more of a politician than a jurist, also a knock against her along with her marriage to an administration official, though I don't rule out the possibility that this could be a platform for her political career. And yes, she's definitely a potential Presidential candidate in 2022 or later...
- Deval Patrick - probably never running for President - he's already 59 and has moved on to Bain Capital - not that that would be an obstacle to his being nominated, especially given the strong likelihood that the nomination would fail, but another political pick that I suspect too isn't interested, though without certainty.
- Jeh Johnson - the Director of Homeland Security, who was confirmed by more than 3-1 but without the support of Cruz, Grassley, McConnell, or Rubio, and whose replacement would have to be nominated and confirmed, making him less available than Patrick, e.g.
- Just about anyone well into their 60s or older, e.g. Diane Wood, Eric Holder, Leah Ward Sears, Carlos Moreno, etc.
- Most non-Srinivasan Asian-Americans - Neal Katyal lacks his Senate confirmation hook, and non-Indian Americans aren't as electorally significant
- Just about anyone whose issue or personal profile relates to LBGT rights, e.g. Pam Karlan, Alison Nathan, Paul Smith; that's been fought and won in quite recent memory and brings little political benefit

And some less-mentioned maybes of varying degrees:
- Robert Wilkins - an African-American D.C. Federal appellate judge, former law firm partner, and Harvard grad from Indiana once the subject of the famous "driving while black" case who was narrowly approved by the Democratic Senate in 2014 would draw attention to the issue of racial profiling in a way that few others would. He'd be highly unlikely to be confirmed, but in his case the opposition of most Republican Senators (and his overlapping a year with Obama at HLS) would be the whole point, though possibly one blunted by the potential transparency of the politics.
- Adalberto Jordan - a Cuban-American Federal appellate judge from Florida with a law firm background who once clerked for Sandra Day O'Connor (again, what she would say would be important) and was overwhelmingly approved by the Democratic Senate (including GOP Judiciary Chair Grassley, McConnell, and Rubio, but not Cruz who wasn't yet a Senator) in 2012 is a maybe, but I think he's probably too limited in his personal appeal
- Ray Lohier - a Haitian-(Canadian-)American (he would take his oath on a neon bible, obv) Federal appellate judge and former prosecutor from NYC with a Korean-American wife who was approved unanimously (including by Grassley and McConnell; Cruz and Rubio were not yet Senators) to take Sotomayor's seat by the Democratic Senate in 2010 is really a maybe, but I think his background probably isn't quite right for the desired political impact (same goes for West Indian-American Joe Greenaway, who graduated from one of the country's better high schools and best undergraduate college before settling for Harvard Law School).
- Christine Arguello - a Mexican-American Federal trial court judge from highly-electorally-significant Colorado nominated by George W. Bush (who had earlier chosen not to renominate her after her lame-duck nomination by WJC) in 2008 and confirmed unanimously by voice vote in the Senate. Not an appellate judge/litigator, though (for better or worse), and a bit old at 60.
- Jo-Anne Epps - the law school Dean (and NCAA rep) of Temple U who also chairs Philly's police oversight board (in a somewhat electorally-significant city and state, including for the Senate) would highlight the black lives matter issue, but not in a way that Robert Wilkins wouldn't, and she probably wouldn't receive universal support from that group; a woman, yes, but far less prominent than Lynch
- Mariano Florentino-Cuellar - a Supreme Court of California Justice with degrees from Harvard, Yale, and Stanford who was born in Mexico, grew up in Texas, advised the Obama administration on immigration policy (want to explode Ted Cruz' brain?), and is married to a Korean-American, though her service as a judge in Federal court in California could complicate things. He's only 43 and has never been before the Senate, so fairly unlkely, but personally, I think he'd be a very attractive political choice, combining hispanic, youth, and some asian appeal.

your short list, eh

It's got four names

and lots of dashes

excellent engagement

This guy

Thought we were rid of you

i write crazy long posts as much as the next guy, maybe more, but "engagement" with a thread in progress is not really what was going on there. also it just seriously hurts my eyes to think about reading that. bold the names or use line breaks more judiciously or something.

that's right, you weren't engaging. sorry, my thoughts are deeper than others'.

- Deval Patrick - probably never running for President - he's already 59 and has moved on to Bain Capital - not that that would be an obstacle to his being nominated, especially given the strong likelihood that the nomination would fail, but another political pick that I suspect too isn't interested, though without certainty.

You left out the most important part: Deval's father was saxophonist-composer Pat Patrick, of the Sun Ra Arkestra.

I mean, I guess if I gaf about what other people (pretend to) think is the spirit of the thread i just would have laughed at a bunch of the inclusions(/omissions) and moved on

how deep are your thoughts? I really mean to learn

yeah, learned that earlier today, but irrelevant; xp

lol yes your thoughts are too deep, that's the problem

Will be Srinivasan; he will get through; he will be pro-corporate rights and lousy on criminal procedure.

― Three Word Username, Monday, February 15, 2016 3:43 AM (16 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This make sense. The elite of the GOP care more about pro-business and anti-labor and are probably willing to let go on the social issues that are already probably lost causes for them anyway (especially since I think they mostly care about them for strategic value rather than personal belief).

I mean, I guess if I gaf about what other people (pretend to) think is the spirit of the thread i just would have laughed at a bunch of the inclusions(/omissions) and moved on

Please just move on.

lol yes your thoughts are too deep, that's the problem

― shandemonium padawan (Doctor Casino), Monday, February 15, 2016 8:31 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

We can't all go as in-depth as "It's just a matter of how big you wanna gamble. There is a risk of losing everything: nominee doesn't go through, Republicans somehow win in November and get to appoint this slot and probably a couple more. Of course, even the "safe" nominee might not go through, and, as y'all have observed, the "provocative" nominee may reduce the chance of the Republican win. It's kind of a beautiful conundrum, like you would use this as the setup for a novel or a season of the West Wing or something."

Please just move on.

― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Monday, February 15, 2016 8:36 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Seriously. What do you think the reaction to a post like this is? What benefit do you get out of it?

And what exactly is your problem?

fuck you man, i was saving that one for my tenure application file.

but it's true, it's all true. i'm a hack and a fraud. we can't all be like you, dropping depth charges with post after masterful post. please move on so we can live the rest of our lives in our sad humble peace.

repeat

I posted with Doctor Casino. He is a favorite poster of mine.

You, benbbag, are no Doctor Casino

the funny part is that you speak with the royal we and think that i'm writing for you singular or otherwise. a bit self-congratulatory, no?

a bit self-congratulatory, no?

is he putting us on or are we putting him on

you appointed yourself the audience, but were not intended, man...

this thread is...your coloring book?

your imagination is about that extensive

footnote: Holder's age is not an obstacle given his certain rejection, but his purported scandals are probably (but not definitely) a sufficient excuse for the opposition

Will be Srinivasan; he will get through; he will be pro-corporate rights and lousy on criminal procedure.

― Three Word Username, Monday, February 15, 2016 3:43 AM (16 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

jeez you're making him sound like sub-Breyer

isn't he dipshit who thinks husker du is reuniting

i mean sure engage with the guy but he's such a fuckin dick

I am still tripping out that I went to college with one of these people (Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar; I didn't know him but my wife did.)

Salazar not terribly well liked by left wing of Democratic party, would think Obama would want to avoid nominating a candidate with such a significant public record to criticize.

― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, February 16, 2016 9:06 AM (53 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Of course, hence the "even" - question is whether anyone would really make hay over it given that they're siding with the Ted Cruz-led GOP Congress against someone who isn't even going to be heard, let alone confirmed

But would Obama want a confirmation battle for attorney general at the same time as a SCOTUS one?

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, February 16, 2016 8:57 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Acting AG would step in in the interim, which would be the rest of the term or until prior rejection. Thing is she didn't go through her confirmation not to act as AG but instead to act as a scotus nominee, so I don't think she happens.

X-post to DJP: meanwhile, just up Mass Ave, me & Ted Cruz were hanging at the Hark.

Salazar mentioned because he may be the best hispanic political symbol who is available for sacrifice

I think someone would make some hay over it. I think you want to keep focus on R obstructionism, anything that distracts from that probably not greatest strategy. I'm not totally sure that nominee never gets a vote either despite what McConnel et al is saying.

Larry Echo Hawk, far away in time.

X-post to DJP: meanwhile, just up Mass Ave, me & Ted Cruz were hanging at the Hark.

!!!!!!!! Okay I need some stories

Our paths did not cross much, actually, but I was on the Record and CR-CL, both places where he would be spoken off with a sneer. I found him smarmy as hell the few times I actually was in the same room.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Kamala_Harris_Official_Attorney_General_Photo.jpg

who dis

Kamala Harris

she's like genuinely dreamy. not just political dreamy.

Well barring craziness she's probably going to be a senator for as long as she wants in a minute.

JCLC i get where you're coming from but that wall-o-text post was nuts even if i am hungry for an old-fashioned ILX with more longform posting. if i posted something like that i would 100% not be surprised if it was ignored or tl;dr'ed and i would definitely not then turn it around like everybody else is a big dummy not advanced enough for my genius posts and look at the dumb pundit-y things they are posting instead. i admit i probably would not have responded with a zing if i wasn't still kinda fed up with gabb's politics thread style from the last go-round and maybe it was not super helpful to go that route but come on.

Our paths did not cross much, actually, but I was on the Record and CR-CL, both places where he would be spoken off with a sneer. I found him smarmy as hell the few times I actually was in the same room.

aw, I was sort of hoping that you stealth-punched him at some point

she's like genuinely dreamy. not just political dreamy.

She also happens to be by far the best-looking attorney general in the country.

It's true! C'mon.

Smart-guy Michael Tomasky echoes me on the killer political pick - http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/15/the-gop-s-worst-nightmare-scotus-nominee.html

There's a complication but I'm not going to name it

“He’d be the justice with the most wide-ranging intellect since William O. Douglas.”

Hard to believe a law prof said that, though.

I read the second volume of Douglas' SCOTUS memoir in January. Dude could dish entertainingly.

Can Cuellar?

He's very dynamic

DJP: I once line-edited a strongly-worded editorial that criticized him. Does that count? I mean, it's not a punch in the passaggio or anything.

http://esq.h-cdn.co/assets/16/07/980x490/landscape-1455719459-mcconnell.jpg

Listen, I don't come over here and post pix from your Tumblr fan site, do I?

hey pplains I got your "best-looking" joke, I was about to do the same but not, you know, funny

Thanks. I only steal from the best.

tomasky is a "smart guy" now?

Cuellar
Kelly or Klobuchar
Srinivasan

That's the short list imo

My Limbaugh-lovin' mom said Loretta Lynch, which gives me an idea of what FOX and Rush are putting in their heads.

is she embracing Rush's choice of It's Pat Cruz?

My mom is going to be disappointed if it's Klobuchar; she was looking forward to eventually voting for her for President

Klobuchar is making the rounds saying that she wants to be on the committee doing her Senatorial duty to review the nominee. Some MN media are interpreting that to mean she's taken herself out of the running. Bless their hearts.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/supreme-court-srinivasan-fossil-fuels-scalia-219358

His work as an attorney representing Enron's former CEO and ExxonMobil raises hackles among some eco-activists.

Watford or Srinivasan.

In general, prefer sitting judges (bonus if they have a recent confirmation vote).

Not, please, a senator or cabinet member or generic politician who happens to have been a lawyer at one time.

There have been many justices who were never judges prior to nomination to the SCOTUS. Wm. O. Douglas is a prime example. And as Douglas also exemplifies, the Supreme Court, more easily than a lower court, can absorb a justice who lacks a "judicial temperament", because their opinions will never be reviewed by a higher court. But it certainly helps if a justice has a firm grasp of legal reasoning and excellent persuasive skills.

jfc @ The Politico. 'hackles'. 'eco-activists'.

and Douglas was almost nominated for prez in 1944 (FDR's favorite in his secret heart).

Yeah I know plenty of justices were not judges - heck, they don't even have to be lawyers, strictly speaking. That doesn't mean it's a good idea for Obama to nominate Eric Holder. Or, for that matter, Michelle Obama. Or Bill Clinton.

I like the idea of him being able to respond to GOPers with "If this person is not qualified, why did you confirm him 97-0 just last year?"

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/supreme-court-srinivasan-fossil-fuels-scalia-219358

His work as an attorney representing Enron's former CEO and ExxonMobil raises hackles among some eco-activists.

― curmudgeon, Monday, February 22, 2016 3:52 PM (5 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I worked on this case. Sri didnt do shit except argue it. The partner in charge had to swallow a shitload of pride and ambition to let Sri do it, but he was a fucking pro so it was the right call.

the enron part at least

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Resounding victory for the dudes with the coolest names.

Jane Kelly is the next name leaked to the NY Times

this is pretty fantastic:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2016/03/in_oral_arguments_for_the_texas_abortion_case_the_three_female_justices.html

x-post--

from that Times article--

In a Senate floor speech in 2013, Mr. Grassley effusively praised Judge Kelly, a longtime public defender, just before she won unanimous confirmation to her current position on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

The senator read from a handwritten recommendation letter he had received from a retired judge, David R. Hansen, a Republican appointee he counted as an old friend. Mr. Hansen called Judge Kelly a “forthright woman of high integrity and honest character” and a person of “exceptionally keen intellect.”

“I congratulate Ms. Kelly on her accomplishments and wish her well in her duties,” Mr. Grassley said at the time. “I am pleased to support her confirmation and urge my colleagues to join me.”

Democrats have privately said that selecting Judge Kelly might force Mr. Grassley to change his stance and hold hearings, out of a sense of obligation to a respected jurist from his home state and concern about tarnishing his reputation in Iowa months before he faces re-election. The six-term senator is facing pressure from voters to consider any nominee on the merits, but he said in an interview Wednesday that he would not change his position even for a fellow Iowan.

seems like the Obama/Dem operation (wisely) is targeting Grassley as the weak link here

lmao that gabbneb post

like reading one of those 8 page NYRB politics essays about hypotheticals, two months after the events they predict have failed to happen