Gibbs: No Supreme Court Decision This Week

Batting down suggestions from longtime Republican Judiciary Committee member Orrin Hatch, Robert Gibbs said on Tuesday that the president would not have a nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter in the next few days.

"It's not going to happen this week," said the press secretary, when asked to respond to comments made by the Utah Republican suggesting a choice was imminent.

At the tail end of the Tuesday briefing session, Gibbs was asked whether a decision could be expected sometime next week. He did not immediately have an answer.

Other than providing some detail on the timeline of a Court choice, the topic remained relatively un-addressed on Tuesday. Gibbs repeated the president's desire to find a nominee who was "best qualified for this position."

"Obviously, we want to move this process along in a timely fashion so that the next Justice can take over on the Court the next time the Court begins to hear cases in October," he added.

He also said that while Obama is looking for a "diversity of experience and background" in his Supreme Court choice, he also values experience "outside" of the legal world.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[GravitonX]

10:29 AM on 05/06/2009

I argue that the MOST contentious issue regarding the SCJ pick will be none other than Civil Rights policies like Affirmative Action. That said, Obama is sure to pick someone who is a heavyweight on this issue and the Republicans(racists) are sure to fight it with every ounce of power they can muster.

Get ready.

[Okieborn]

09:28 AM on 05/06/2009

Al Gore Is My Pick !!!!

[dwright]

08:02 AM on 05/06/2009

Did we do this when Bush was able to pick? I don't remember all of us second guessing and jumping to filibuster before a pick was even made.

[lochnessmonster]

07:01 AM on 05/06/2009

Those old white dudes in congress are the biggest gossips. When will they learn to keep their traps shut?

[BARRISTER]

05:41 AM on 05/06/2009

MICHELLE OBAMA for the SCOTUS!!!!!

[FunComments]

02:14 AM on 05/06/2009

I would think Jerry Springer would be a fine pick for the Supreme Court. He has empathy and humor, knows a thing about ordinary people (trailer park folk), and is a liberal.

It should also make the news networks a huge increase in profits as people will want to read (or at least learn to read) just to find out what his views are on various topics.

Not much chance that Scalia would give him the last word though.

[Christopher Ballesteros]

12:47 AM on 05/06/2009

While it's interesting to speculate as to who will replace Souter, Obama's eventual choice will have little ideological impact on the Supreme Court. Although Souter was appointed by Bush 41, his voting habits have been generally liberal; meaning that his replacement (who will be at least moderately liberal) will maintain the current political makeup of the court as opposed to substantially shifting it. Until one of the more conservative justices or the swing vote (Kennedy) steps down, Obama's appointments will be essentially null.

What I do think will be very telling about the nomination process will be the GOP's reaction given that their only viable weapon against the nominee is a filibuster.

[rsprags]

01:48 AM on 05/06/2009

They will not be able to filibuster anything; GOP are not gracious enough to realize they have no power. Demo was out of power they still continued to participate in the democratic process and displayed graciousness in the minority role.

[ObamAtomic]

12:15 AM on 05/06/2009

Orrin! Wrong again.
Your party lost the election,understand!
Are you Obama spokesperson?

[walk0nwalls]

11:15 PM on 05/05/2009

JUDGE JUDY FOR SUPREME COURT

[platanoman]

11:06 PM on 05/05/2009

Try again Hatch.

[PlayTOE]

08:57 PM on 05/05/2009

What .. was someone expecting Obama to make a hasty ill informed decision?
Give him time ...

[unitron]

08:38 PM on 05/05/2009

Independently wealthy law school graduate and former NY Attorney General Elliot Spitzer seems have a reputation refurbishment PR campaign going on lately.

He'd be an interesting sacrifical nomination--let the Republicans gives themselves apoplexy over him, and then when they vote him down, nominate the person you really wanted, who'll look much better by comparison.

[GotRights]

10:33 PM on 05/05/2009

He'd make an excellent justice. Too bad it's politically impossible.

[JZ735]

08:15 PM on 05/05/2009

Replacing Souter with anyone save an arch conservative would not be news...this is ho-hum at best.

[Wallysmom]

07:59 PM on 05/05/2009

I think it should be Gore...seeing that everyone would like to see a non-judge type on the bench. Gore would be pragmatic and stick to the ruling according to the Constitution.

[ObserverinVancouver]

10:09 PM on 05/05/2009

There's a slight difference between a non-judge and a non-lawyer. IIRC, Al Gore has never been a lawyer or even a law school grad.

[Wallysmom]

11:26 PM on 05/05/2009

Gore was involved in American politics for 24 years. The Constitution of the United States establishes no requirements to be appointed a Justice on the Supreme Court. Presidents usually appoint people who have been lawyers or judges or in some way trained in the law but it is not a prerequisite. It is more important that they know how to interpret the body of the Constitution as it applies to cases. Most cases brought to the Supreme Court are in issues relating to government, something Gore knows a lot about.

[MIVOTE]

07:19 PM on 05/05/2009

What!? Orinn Hatch was wrong?

[bubbuh]

07:39 PM on 05/05/2009

He and his buddy Arlen have been consulting again.