Agreed. This liberal was rooting for Scalia, for the reasons you described. (Well, I think you exagerated Brennan’s diplomatic skill, but still…)
Roberts seems to be a fairly affable fellow.
Curses! Foiled again!
Ah…Isn’t this the same Thurgood Marshall who almost single-handedly argued several landmark civil rights cases before the Court, with considerable success? I’m no expert in Thurgood Marshall but I could hardly imagine he is as you have described him!
Politically, Roberts is a good choice for CJ for the same reasons he was a good choice in the first place. He was overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate just two years ago. There will have to be some pretty severe tap dancing by any Senator that thought he was just fine for the DC court of appeals but is totally wrong for the Supreme Court.
Plus if there were any smoking guns, Shumer and Kennedy, et al, would have been bleating to the high heavens already.
Once Roberts is confirmed, Bush can proceed to the token nomination.
Roberts should do something like that; wear a red robe or a judicial wig.
As a Supreme Court justice, Marshall spent most of his time sitting around in a bathrobe or pajamas, watching soap operas. He rarely even pretended to care about the cases he was supposed to be ruling on. “Find out how BRennan is voting” was his standard command to his clerks.
No, I’d say “lazy boor” is about right.
Could it be that Roberts is the more moderate nomination that GW will make? Don’t want to pick more of a fight than one needs too.
I’m sorry if somebody already said this, but it seems to me that since Roberts is no longer O’Connor’s replacement - now he’s Rehnquist’s - O’Connor will stay on the bench a little longer. There’s no chance a second appointment would get through the Senate by the time the Court’s term starts on October 3. So the shifting of Roberts’s nomination also makes sure there will be the usual nine justices at that time.
How old is Scalia? How old is Roberts? Bush wants a CJ that’ll be around for a while.
69 and 50, respectively.
I don’t think she can - she’s sent her letter of resignation, creating the vacancy that President Bush used to nominate Roberts originally. The death of Chief Justice Rehnquist has created a second vacancy.
If I was Scalia, I’d be a bit miffed. Or any of the AJs for that matter. Having the new kid on the block come in and be boss just seems odd.
No, here letter of resignation is effective (by her specifications) when her replacement is confirmed by the Senate. So she’s never been out. Technically she has no replacement named.
It’s possible, though IMO not very likely, that Scalia just doesn’t want the job. There were rumblings a few years ago that he didn’t want to stay on the SCOTUS forever, and that he wanted to make some money in the private sector while he still had some good working years left. (My guess is that he could make an order of magnitude more money on the lecture circuit and in the private sector than he does while on the Court.)
Don’t know how true it ever was, or still is, but I’ve heard it more than once.
Definitely an important factor. After all, Thomas was only 43 when he was seated. Politically, appoint them as young as possible. IMHO, this also speaks to Pres. Bush querying Roberts about his exercise habits. It suggests the potential for longevity.
Cite? I’ll like to know what are you basing this on.
It’s apparently from “The Bretheren” book
Article - The Many Masks of Thurgood Marshall
Behind the Justice’s Curmudgeonly Persona
A Special Kind of Torment
By Juan Williams
The Washington Post January 31, 1993
Thurgood Marshall’s best days and greatest accomplishments were clearly before he was named to the Supreme Court. His work ethic while an associate justice left a lot to be desired, from what I’ve read in the *The Brethren * and elsewhere.
Plus, he kept wearing white socks with dark suits and judicial robes. What was up with that? 
's Catholics 