Comments on: Two Vacancies this Summer?

By: A Speculation Too Far « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST

A Speculation Too Far « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:18:48 +0000

[...] this November. And we can talk about whether such a potential change in Congress will impact the list of potential successors to Justice Ginsburg should she retire during Obama’s first term. But please, no more futile talk of who will [...]

By: ATL Echoes F1@1F Re: Wood « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST

ATL Echoes F1@1F Re: Wood « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST — Wed, 05 May 2010 19:45:55 +0000

[...] my thoughts as expressed on F1@1F’s first day of existence in late December, as well as several times pieces I’ve posted [...]

By: Friends of F1@1F: Interview w/ Toobin & McDonald Esoterica « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:38:20 +0000

[...] seat, but none of them are on Obama’s shortlist. The President would do well to wait for Justice Ginsburg’s retirement to start experimenting with unknown [...]

By: SCOTUSReligion « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST

SCOTUSReligion « FIRST ONE @ ONE FIRST — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:37:38 +0000

[...] fact, Kagan may have time yet before she gets her much-expected nomination to the bench. I think Justice Ginsburg’s [...]

By: Miguel

Miguel — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:28:19 +0000

I’m willing to bet you on that Obama as 3rd Justice, Mike – your choice of bet if reasonable terms. My guess is Koh doesn’t have much of a shot because of the incredible xenophobia and anti-internationalism rampant in our ‘representative institutions.’ Wood or Kagan seems likely enough though. (Or McKeown?)

By: The Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Jockeying Over the Next Nominee

The Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Jockeying Over the Next Nominee — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:07:59 +0000

[...] More speculation here. Categories: Judicial [...]

By: Mike Sacks

Mike Sacks — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:55:57 +0000

I thought about Granholm, but I believe that Obama would only consider her in competition with Wood, not alongside her.

I don’t think Obama will go more radical a la Reagan’s third nomination. Obama could try to mimic the Rehnquist/Scalia one-two punch by putting forward for his first nominee someone the GOP will find objectionable (e.g. Koh’s international law views; Katyal’s representation of Bin Laden’s chauffer), allowing for a party-line vote on that nominee, and then put forward someone otherwise far more objectionable like Wood, hoping that she’d get an overwhelming vote from an exhausted opposition party a la Scalia.

But in today’s climate, I don’t think that would be a wise choice. If the Republicans’ heads overheat over a more moderate nominee, their heads will explode with a more liberal nominee. Today’s Senate Democrats, afraid of the 2010 elections, may not have the political will to withstand GOP vitriol for two immediately successive nominations.

Further still, if Ginsburg does retire, she will certainly coordinate with Stevens so that there will not be two vacancies into November by a filibustering GOP minority. Unless one retires and the other unexpectedly dies–a la O’Connor and Rehnquist–I don’t think we will see a double vacancy this summer.

By: Stan

Stan — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:34:58 +0000

How about Jennifer Granholm? If he’s picking another former judge to fill a Justice’s seat, I think he should throw a curveball and put in someone with political experience, since we haven’t had one since SOC. Also, if Stevens and Ginsburg retires, I wonder if Obama should do what Reagan should have done with Bork – slip him in as the second nominee right after tiring out the opposition in Congress a controversial one (Rehnquist). Because Reagan went with Scalia, who was largely unopposed at the time, over Bork, Democrats were able to recharge and knock Bork out, ending up with Kennedy instead. So since Wood is likely going to draw a huge amount of heat, what’s your thoughts about slipping a more radical nominee, say Pam Karlan, in behind Wood, and daring Republicans to fight both battles?