Will Rehnquist Step Down Before the Election to Ensure a Bush Replacement?

I'd be really disappointed if the GOP pulled such an 11th hour fast-one, but then again, I was disappointed by Gore and the Dems when they played partisan during the recounts...
 
Too late. Any appointment after, I guess, May of this year would have already been too late to get the Dems to consider letting it through. In any case, any vacancy now would certainly wait until after the election, and in the case of a Kerry victory, after Jan 20 for action.
 
Aren't the leftist supposed to be the ones responsible for wacky anti-Conservative conspiracy theories? Has AUP become sick and asked you to stand in for him?
 
I concur with the judgment that a replacement could not be named and confirmed before the new presidential term starts.

Chances are pretty good there would need to be two Senate hearings: one to name a new justice, and one to name a new chief justice. It is possible, of course, that whoever is president could nominate a new justice and have that justice be chief. Considering the longevity of the current court, however, it might be deemed disrespectful for the chief executive to name a novice to lead the court.

It seems pretty clear that Rehnquist is on his way out. I found it somewhat odd that the MSNBC article made mention of Chief Justice Roger Taney, who was the infamous author of the Dred Scott decision.
 
Brown said:
It is possible, of course, that whoever is president could nominate a new justice and have that justice be chief.
Click to expand...

Is that possible? I admit to never considering it. I thought the chief justice position was at the pleasure of the other members of the court.
 
Re: Re: Will Rehnquist Step Down Before the Election to Ensure a Bush Replacement?

Kerberos said:
Aren't the leftist supposed to be the ones responsible for wacky anti-Conservative conspiracy theories? Has AUP become sick and asked you to stand in for him?
Click to expand...

You have no idea how putrid American politics can be.
 
Rob Lister said:
Is that possible? I admit to never considering it. I thought the chief justice position was at the pleasure of the other members of the court.
Click to expand...
Nope, elevation to chief justice is by presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. It can happen all at once by nominating a chief justice to fill a vacancy in the chief's spot, or by nominating a sitting justice to be chief (which is how Renquist became chief when Warren Berger retired).
 
Thanks for the facts everyone. It seems my pessimism regarding American politics got the better of me.

So lets consider this one...

Could Kerry propel himself into the White House in these last few weeks before the election by playing on the now much more realistic fears of a Bush appointment if he were to be reelected?
 
Kodiak said:
Thanks for the facts everyone. It seems my pessimism regarding American politics got the better of me.

So lets consider this one...

Could Kerry propel himself into the White House in these last few weeks before the election by playing on the now much more realistic fears of a Bush appointment if he were to be reelected?
Click to expand...

That's a double-edged sword if I ever saw (read) one.

This news event does bring the SC issue to the top.

If all the voters suddenly realize what is at stake in regards to the supreme court, will Kerry get more support? I don't think so but I'm a bit biased. I think he'll lose some of the support he currently has.
 
hgc said:
Nope, elevation to chief justice is by presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. It can happen all at once by nominating a chief justice to fill a vacancy in the chief's spot, or by nominating a sitting justice to be chief (which is how Renquist became chief when Warren Berger retired).
Click to expand...
And as it happened, neither Burger, nor his immediate predecessor, Earl Warren, were on the Court when they were appointed Chief Justice by Nixon and Eisenhower, respectively.

Useless SC trivia #1: Chief Justice Earl Warren was followed by Chief Justice Warren Earl (Burger).

Useless SC trivia #2: There is no such person as the "Chief Justice of the Supreme Court." His title is actually "Chief Justice of the United States."
 
Kodiak said:
Thanks for the facts everyone. It seems my pessimism regarding American politics got the better of me.

So lets consider this one...

Could Kerry propel himself into the White House in these last few weeks before the election by playing on the now much more realistic fears of a Bush appointment if he were to be reelected?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, a relatively small portion of the electorate is as motivated by the specter Republicans picking judges as I am. This plays to the base, and to a fraction of that.
 
Kodiak said:
Could Kerry propel himself into the White House in these last few weeks before the election by playing on the now much more realistic fears of a Bush appointment if he were to be reelected?
Click to expand...
Yes, I can hear it now, in Kerry's stentorian tones:

"If William Rhenquist dies of throat cancer, who do you want appointing his successor?"

Do you think he'd be that insensitive...?
 
BPSCG said:
And as it happened, neither Burger, nor his immediate predecessor, Earl Warren, were on the Court when they were appointed Chief Justice by Nixon and Eisenhower, respectively.

Useless SC trivia #1: Chief Justice Earl Warren was followed by Chief Justice Warren Earl (Burger).

Useless SC trivia #2: There is no such person as the "Chief Justice of the Supreme Court." His title is actually "Chief Justice of the United States."
Click to expand...
You should have stuck to your "what hgc said" stance. ;)

Chief Justice Earl Warren (Eisenhower, 1953) was succeeded by Chief Justice Warren Berger (Nixon, 1969). Associate Justice William Rehquist (Nixon, 1971) was elevated to Chief Justice (Reagan, 1986) upon Berger's retirement.
 
hgc said:
Unfortunately, a relatively small portion of the electorate is as motivated by the specter Republicans picking judges as I am. This plays to the base, and to a fraction of that.
Click to expand...
I agree. Plus, most Americans probably don't know what the Supreme Court is, anyway.
 
hgc said:
You should have stuck to your "what hgc said" stance. ;)

Chief Justice Earl Warren (Eisenhower, 1953) was succeeded by Chief Justice Warren Berger (Nixon, 1969). Associate Justice William Rehquist (Nixon, 1971) was elevated to Chief Justice (Reagan, 1986) upon Berger's retirement.
Click to expand...
BPSCG: Please ignore this post. I didn't even read yours before responding.
 
hgc said:
BPSCG: Please ignore this post. I didn't even read yours before responding.
Click to expand...
I'd always suspected that was a habit of yours... :p
 
Why all the fuss, don't they have to pass the Senate. And who ever it is better be ready for a full public rectal exam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom