Speculation over the retirements of several other Supreme Court Justices ran wild through Washington on Friday. At some point during the day, rumors had nearly every Justice retiring or resigning.
The media, traditional and online, ran with each and every rumor making it difficult to discern where the truth was. In fact, no one retired yesterday and there is no word on any pending retirements.
One intrepid reporter tracked down Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and asked him when he would retire. The 80 year-old jurist responded, "That's for me to know and you to find out." Way to go Mr. Rehnquist.
Of course, much of the speculation online was fueled by the less than dependable Drudge Report. The headline there was "Media on standby after growing reports Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist is handing in his resignation ... DEVELOPING."
With the president returning from the G8 conference, it was a slow news day in Washington. So, media types decided to fill the air with rumor and speculation.
Yes, it is possible that Chief Justice Rehnquist will retire, but he is likely to hold off until President Bush names a replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Supreme Court Speculation Fuels Rumors - Yahoo! News
Tags: Supreme Court , Cheif Justice William H. Rehnquist
--
Meanwhile the partisan bickering and complaining has begun in earnest. The president has yet to name a replacement for Justice O'Connor, but Democrats and liberals are ready to fight whoever Bush selects.
The message from the Senate Democrats is unclear. It depends on who is the real leader for Senate democrats. If it is Ted Kennedy (D-MA), the debate will rage for months or years. There will be a protracted filibuster. If it is Harry Reid (D-NV), there could be a filibuster, but his position changes daily. If it is Charles Schumer (D-NY), the candidates will be asked questions on how the WOULD rule on "hot button" issues, like abortion. Senate Republicans have already said that Schumer's questions would be inappropriate and shoe a lack of understanding of the confirmation process and tradition.
Senate Democrats, more than anything else, want to control the nomination process to the point of picking the nominee or telling the president that any nominee he sends to the Senate will have a tough confirmation process.
The Democrats want to know, specifically, who the president is considering before he send any nomination to the Senate. That's not "advise and consent" that's "we want to select the nominee for you." "We want to 'bash' the nominee before we see who it is." "We want to tell our liberal friends who the nominee is so they can begin ads on TV against the nominee."
Much of this has already been done with speculation that the president may nominate Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the post. Both liberal and conservatives are saying Gonzales is not qualified and does not have the proper "temperament" to be a Supreme Court Justice. Gonzales was a Texas Supreme Court Justice before joining the Bush administration.
"To be meaningful, consultation should include who the president is really considering so we can give responsive and useful advice," Senator Kennedy said. Again, tell us who you will nominate or anybody will have a tough confirmation process.
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) has said that he would like a Justice in the mold of liberal icon Chief Justice Earl Warren. The Warren Court was one of the worst in history. Warren lead the commission into the assassination of President Kennedy that was so full of flaws and missed evidence that it has fueled speculation for decades. The Warren Court is also responsible for many decision that bolstered the rights or criminals and would considered today as an activist court. If there is anything the country does not need it is another Supreme Court Justice like Earl Warren. Sen Reid you are living in a dream world.
Will there be a filibuster on the president's nominee? Yes, there is no doubt about. It will be led by Sens. Kennedy and Schumer. Many of the 7 "moderate" Democrats who agreed to only filibuster in an "extraordinary circumstance," will find any nominee of the president's to meet that criteria. It is likely that Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) will be the first to break the agreement.
At that point it will be up to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to recover his leadership and, finally, put into place a ban on judicial nominee filibusters. If he does not, there will not be a full Supreme Court until after a new president is elected in 2008.
Dems Want Talks With Bush on Nominees - Yahoo! News
Tage: Supreme Court
--
More on Monday.
No comments:
Post a Comment