# Souter to retire- let the speculation begin! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 1, 2009, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924 "2009-05-01T02:41:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/81 "2009-05-02T13:22:19Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Right. The idiots look only at the gender and race of the candidate. What are _you_ doing? ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/82 "2009-05-02T13:44:04Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I think the majority of the media audience doesn’t know anything or really care about constitutional law or Supreme Court jurisprudence and will only be infotained by discussion of race and gender. So that’s what the media does. To the extent the media talks about more relevant factors, it will probably be even more painful to watch–inevitably focusing on abortion I disagree. I think most Americans care about the \*views \*of that Justice. The nomination of an Asian-American lesbian who upheld affirmative action laws could get appointed to replace Souter. You swap ‘unheld affirmative action laws’ with ‘sided with Big Business’ and you’d have a no-go appointment. It’s my belief that Americans are most concerned on whether the nominee is a ‘liberal’ or ‘Republican’. Race and gender are secondary. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/83 "2009-05-02T13:54:03Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Obama should rise above that and not appease the idiots. And the only way to do that is to nominate a white guy? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/84 "2009-05-02T14:19:13Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > I disagree. > > I think most Americans care about the \*views \*of that Justice. The nomination of an Asian-American lesbian who upheld affirmative action laws could get appointed to replace Souter. You swap ‘unheld affirmative action laws’ with ‘sided with Big Business’ and you’d have a no-go appointment. > > It’s my belief that Americans are most concerned on whether the nominee is a ‘liberal’ or ‘Republican’. Race and gender are secondary. > > - Honesty I’m not sure why you find that to be in contradiction with what I wrote. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/85 "2009-05-02T14:31:57Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I also want to get this off my chest, even though it is not entirely relevant to SCOTUS appointments: I find this absolutist view of even benign race-based decisionmaking as evil discrimination to be thoroughly ahistorical. In less than a generation a significant proportion of white Americans somehow went from “discriminatory racism is OK” to “government must be race blind,” skipping over any thought of remedial race-conscious actions… You are an amazingly astute observer and analyst, and one of the best posters on this board. And since I disagree with so many of your views, that’s a bitter pill. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/86 "2009-05-02T14:36:40Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Imagine it’s 2016. Could he appoint himself? With Obama’s background, and _if_ he has a successful term and _if_ he expresses interest, he might have a good shot of being appointed to fill a vacancy during some future Democrat president’s term. Heck, he’ll only be in his mid-fifties eight years from now. He can afford to wait through a Republican replacement or two and still be vital enough for a spot on SCOTUS. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/87 "2009-05-02T15:03:38Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > What are _you_ doing? Pointing out that others are looking only at the gender and race of the candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/88 "2009-05-02T15:05:10Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > And the only way to do that is to nominate a white guy? I didn’t say that, or even hint at that. I don’t care about the gender or race of the nominee, but I do care that they are selected for reasons beyond their gender or race. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/89 "2009-05-02T15:08:02Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > But since you brought it up, I just wanted to express my disagreement with this approach and leave it there. While your post was rather :rolleyes: both in its substance and posture (“I want to say my piece but am not interested in a debate on the subject”), your wish is granted and I won’t respond. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/90 "2009-05-02T15:28:10Z")
Granholm should get it. Gov. of Michigan is a career killing position now and it would be nice to see someone from Michigan get a secure job. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/91 "2009-05-02T15:28:17Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Pointing out that others are looking only at the gender and race of the candidate. But that’s not true at all. People _are_ looking at that, because it’s quite likely that Obama will seek to increase the diversity on the Court, but those aren’t the only criteria under discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/92 "2009-05-02T15:37:48Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > But that’s not true at all. People _are_ looking at that, because it’s quite likely that Obama will seek to increase the diversity on the Court, but those aren’t the only criteria under discussion. You are right that people are discussing other characteristics, and I shouldn’t have implied that they weren’t. But they are discussing those other characteristics only after reducing the pool of likely nominees down to women and minorities. It is that first reduction that I think is illegitimate. Increasing “diversity” on the court is not a worthwhile goal in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/93 "2009-05-02T15:40:21Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > I didn’t say that, or even hint at that. I don’t care about the gender or race of the nominee, but I do care that they are selected for reasons beyond their gender or race. So if Sonia Sotomayor is nominated, would you conclude it was because she is a distinguished federal judge, or just Obama kowtowing to those who want a woman or a person of Latin descent? ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/94 "2009-05-02T15:41:50Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Pointing out that others are looking only at the gender and race of the candidate. Seems to me like you’re the one focusing on gender and race. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/95 "2009-05-02T15:42:58Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > But they are discussing those other characteristics only after reducing the pool of likely nominees down to women and minorities. It is that first reduction that I think is illegitimate. And if Obama were doing the same thing, I’d agree with you. However, people are discussing his likely appointment, and since there is currently a grand total of one woman and one black guy on the Court, it is likely that he will want to appoint someone who is not a white male. He’ll probably also want to appoint a liberal. Is that reduction illegitimate? > [@Rand Rover](#): > > Increasing “diversity” on the court is not a worthwhile goal in my opinion. Why not? Obviously an unqualified candidate should not be nominated on account of race or gender, but I don’t think there’s any danger of that happening. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/96 "2009-05-02T15:54:35Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I guess it is just a sense that being a lifetime appointment the justices can “break” with political ideology and vote their conscience/law and not concern themselves with politics. Souter was deemed a moderate conservative appointment then leaned largely liberal. IIRC there have been some other justices in the past who “broke” with the political ideology they were chosen for in the past as well, much to the dismay of the party that thought they had a lock there. > > I guess for me it is just a sense or wish for how I thought (or wished) it should be (a branch of government largely separate from politics) getting smashed against the actual reality of it all. > > What can I say…I’m a bit of an idealist. 😉 I recommend [The Brethren](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Brethren_(non-fiction)) by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong (assuming you haven’t already read it). It’s a pretty interesting look at how the Court worked in the late 60s and early 70s. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/97 "2009-05-02T16:04:55Z")
**Rand** , _given_ a pool of qualified nominees, is it reasonable to consider other “identity” issues (and again, I include perceived political leaning as one part of that “identity”)? Is the public _perception_ that the country’s highest court is not the domain of old White guys worth anything at all or not? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/98 "2009-05-02T16:16:46Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > So if Sonia Sotomayor is nominated, would you conclude it was because she is a distinguished federal judge, or just Obama kowtowing to those who want a woman or a person of Latin descent? What do you think? The opposite of that is the right answer. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/99 "2009-05-02T16:18:34Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > **Rand** , _given_ a pool of qualified nominees, is it reasonable to consider other “identity” issues (and again, I include perceived political leaning as one part of that “identity”)? IMHO no. > [@](#): > > Is the public _perception_ that the country’s highest court is not the domain of old White guys worth anything at all or not? IMHO it’s worth nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924/100 "2009-05-02T16:20:34Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > And if Obama were doing the same thing, I’d agree with you. However, people are discussing his likely appointment, and since there is currently a grand total of one woman and one black guy on the Court, it is likely that he will want to appoint someone who is not a white male. He’ll probably also want to appoint a liberal. Is that reduction illegitimate? IMHO yes. > [@](#): > > Why not? Obviously an unqualified candidate should not be nominated on account of race or gender, but I don’t think there’s any danger of that happening. Obama should appoint the best person for the job regardless of that person’s race or gender. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/souter-to-retire-let-the-speculation-begin/494924.md?page=6)