…Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died Saturday evening at his home in suburban Virginia at the age of 80.
My thoughts and prayers go out to his friends and family.
Quick political thoughts:
The Democrats are now in a bind: do they take a stand against the confirmation of the eminently qualified John Roberts (who doesn’t have the kind of paper trail that will sink him) and save their ammunition for the next nominee? Or do they try to defeat Roberts, on the grounds that he is replacing a more “centrist” Justice and is “far right” —something they won’t be able to sell with the replacement for Rehnquist…?
Interesting times.
(h/t Dan Riehl, CraigC, and Onestoopid1, all via email)
****
update: additional thoughts here, from Steve Muscatello.
WHY MUST EVERYTHING BE POLITICAL WITH YOU? HUH?
Because of the CYNICISM!
The question is not if they will be obstructionist, but how….
so on fox they were talking to susan estrich and she was telling stories about hanging out and smoking with rehnquist. who knew she smoked?
surprisingly she talked about how great he was, didn’t agree with him ideologically, but he was a good man.
Interesting times indeed, so much for them to rabble rouse about these days, but if they divide their efforts too far the effect is that much lessened.
i think Roberts will be raised to CJ, and Estrada the next nominee. Here’s a little why Estrada:
http://www.confirmthem.com/?p=990
I bet Rove was behind this to distract from Katrina.
The question is, me, what Rove will do to distract from the coverage of the nominee for Renquist’s replacement. Another hurricane? Or perhaps a nice destructive earthquake in CA? The mind boggles at his genius and creativity.
i’m thinking volcano. i mean, what happened with that whole watching mt. st. helens a few months ago? KKKarl was just warming up.
tw: show, indeed.
Looks like that racist Bush is going to have a chance to appoint the first ever black Chief Justice.
oooooh, beck, that’s evil.
Let’s at least let the good Justice Rehnquist get buried before we start digging politics TOO fast.
well, ohnoes, reports are there’s already some good threads on kos and DU. god, what am i saying?
Well, they’re the internet’s bodily waste, I’d like to think we can one-up them on the human beings scale.
I clicked your link to Riehl. Instead of a post discussing William Rehnquist’s death, it was a video showing Saddam in his skivvies. Apparently he thinks you should have credited him at the beginning of your post, not at the end.
God rest his soul.
R.I.P Chief Justice Rehnquist.
What if the administration withdraws Roberts nomination and resubmits him as the new Chief Justice? Justice O’Conner remains on the court until her replacement is named, whomever that may be.
Turing word: view, as in everyone has one.
And then, of course, Justice O’Connor’s seat could be filed by a woman, thus helping to more permanently cement the racial/ethnic/gender balkanization of the Supreme Court.
Sorry for misspelling Justice O’Connor’s name in the previous comment.
Turing word: ready, as in I was born ready.
One more thing, how about getting the Senate to get off it’s ass and move forward on all fronts with its business. With the liberation of Iraq, the aftermath of Katrina, two vacancies on the Supreme Court, and who knows what else on the horizon, can’t we move past all the usual posturing?
Man, August seems like so long ago.
Turing word: outside, as in outside looking in.
1. May Justice Rehnquist rest in peace. I notices the leftist moonbats want to dance on his grave. Hmmm..lack of moral compass or too much energy from receiving welfare checks and not working?
2. This is Pres. Bush’s rendevouz with the destiny. He must appoint a Justice who is a strict constructionist. End of story. No ifs and buts. Repeat, strict constructionist…
“BUSH’S NEXT SUPREME COURT NOMINEE – SCALIA AND THOMAS CLONE”
History will judge George W. Bush with his nominees, and of course confirmations.
3. And meanwhile
PRESIDENT BUSH TEMPORARILY NOMINATES JUDGE JUDY UNTIL A REAL JUSTICE IS CONFIRMED
The leftist moonbats will even oppose her.
That was a joke, by the way. It’ll make sense if you go to Wizbang or my site.
C Austin —
That’s not the way it works; the president can’t nominate Roberts as a new associate justice and also chief justice at the same time; those are separate processes.
But this raises a nice tactical question: since there are three processes involved (two new associates and elevation of an associate to chief), and the Republicans can pretty well control the timing and sequence of those processes, what is the most politically advantageous schedule?
I’m sure a lot of people got the joke, Patterico. I saw reference to it on Ms. Malkin’s site. I make a point of avoiding Riehl’s site though, he doesn’t seem like a very nice fellow.
Quiggs: are we sure the Prez is going to elevate one of the current associates? Call me naive, but I’m hoping he chooses the best person for the job, rather than overly concern himself with working the process to political advantage. I must admit though, I’m of the opinion that total war in the Senate over one or more of these processes wouldn’t be a bad thing. As Jeff said in another debate on another topic, let’s have the debate.
Quiggs is wrong. IIRC, eleven out of sixteen previous Chief Justices have been appointed to the Supreme Court as the Chief Justice. Only five have been elevated from Associate Justice to Chief Justice.
Turing word: white, as in Byron.
I think you and Quiggs are talking about two different things, Charles. I’m not sure exactly what he’s saying, but the question I have is, do we have reason to believe Bush is going to elevate one of the associates? I’d be surprised if he does, but I can’t pretend to have any inside info on the subject.
Having taken the time to reread Quiggs more carefully, it is perhaps true that Roberts cannot be nominated for associate and chief justice at the same time, but that’s not what I wrote. Everything I wrote above in this comment thread remains correct.
Matt, Charles—I guess I wasn’t clear. The President certainly could propose Roberts for CJ, even though he’s new. My point was that the Senate will have three separate issues for consideration and, even assuming Bush makes all three decisions based on pure merit rather than political considerations, he still has control over the timing and sequence of the Senate deliberations, and said control can be used for political advantage without compromising the quality of those decisions.
The President is nominating Roberts for Chief Justice, my assumption being that his nomination for Associate Justice is withdrawn in favor of CJ.