More

Readers: Give Us Your Supreme Opinions!

First Posted: 06/06/09 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 02:20 PM ET

David Souter

In announcing his criteria for a replacement for outgoing Supreme Court Justice David Souter, President Barack Obama put an idea on the table that's drawn a lot of attention. In addition to the need for a justice who could demonstrate that he or she is "dedicated to the rule of law." capable of honoring "our constitutional traditions," and showing respect for "the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role," Obama put out an idea that was decidedly "street-level."

"I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes," the president said.

It's an interesting concept -- a judge with the experience to know what sort of impact high-flown legal wranglings have on the lives of ordinary Americans. Of course, since then, the media have latched upon this idea as something either tantalizingly shiny or intimidatingly alien, and they have set themselves to the typical, conventional task of "decoding" what it means. Meanwhile, we've all been given the shortlists of various "experts" to nose over, the names of individuals who were widely suspected of being in line with Obama's leanings well before he was given the opportunity to take office, let alone consider a court appointment.

However, what if we went looking for a jurist whose quality of empathy, and whose demonstrated regard for the lives of ordinary citizens, made him or her the ideal, if unlikely, candidate for the court?

I sort of hate to call this project, "Who are the Supreme Court candidates in your neighborhood?" But that's what we're asking our readership: to get away from the shortlists, unplug ourselves from the lobbying and favor-currying, and try to identify judges, jurists, or legal professionals who would bring a measure of real-world relatability to the Supreme Court, who could make Obama's pledge to find a guy who's walked in an ordinary citizen's shoes a reality. In other words, who's on your shortlist?

We ask this knowing full well that having never been asked for your opinion on this matter, you may not have given it much thought at all. Maybe we won't be able to do better than the experts who've already been advancing names to the press. Still, we'd like to hear from our readership, if not the names of people, then the qualities that are important to you or the legal concerns that impact your life.

If you have an opinion -- or a dissent! -- please share it with us, whether it's a personal nomination, an overlooked area of legal concern, or a specific criteria you'd look for in a Supreme Court nominee. We want to hear from you. Please send us an email, and be as detailed as you like. We'll look at it as an amicus brief!


[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

In announcing his criteria for a replacement for outgoing Supreme Court Justice David Souter, President Barack Obama put an idea on the table that's drawn a lot of attention. In addition to the need ...
In announcing his criteria for a replacement for outgoing Supreme Court Justice David Souter, President Barack Obama put an idea on the table that's drawn a lot of attention. In addition to the need ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 153
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
07:28 PM on 05/17/2009
Sottomayor is my pick. Unlikely to be a "yessum" judge.
10:07 PM on 05/07/2009
My pick: Supreme Court Justice Barney Frank.

(Scalia's head explodes...)
10:09 PM on 05/07/2009
Nope, gotta be a woman and one who can do like the POTUS does: "hit the floor running...:

Judge Bea Ann Smith

Judge Smith has served as President of the National Association of Women Judges and on the Board of Directors of the International Association of Women Judges.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
patrickmcdougal
03:47 PM on 05/07/2009
Gov. Jennifer Granholm
01:17 PM on 05/07/2009
Judge Bea Ann Smith

Judge Smith has served as President of the National Association of Women Judges and on the Board of Directors of the International Association of Women Judges. She is a member of the American Law Institute.

http://beaannsmith.com/
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
HLL
Women, their rights & nothing less ~ SusanBAnthony
01:05 PM on 05/07/2009
Whomever the candidates are - please be sure they are WOMEN. That court needs a serious dose of estrogen.
01:00 PM on 05/07/2009
What happened to my comment about possibly having a Muslim Supreme Court Justice. Was that too controversial for HUFF. Jeez... Would it be too controversial to have John Roberts swearing in - the Honorable Jabril Hafez Abdul Muhammad.

Let's see if this one makes it through...
12:45 PM on 05/07/2009
Richard Bieder out of Connecticut. A regular trial lawyer with a base in the community. This is what Obams needs. Not an academic or high profile woman (for woman's sake). He needs someone that is a regular "Joe" that knows the law and is accustomed to fighting for the underdog. John Edwards/Eliot Spitzer both are off the list due to their extramarital foibles. Also, add Helen Shaw, Lucy Scott-Moncrieff, Gareth Peirce and Louise Christian to the list. Of course they'd have to be vetted thoroughly. How's that for a stereotype.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vinca
12:26 PM on 05/07/2009
Since, it seems it has to be a woman, I HAVE TWO WOMEN, THAT I LIKE EQUALLY, DIANE WOOD AND BETH BRINKMANN.
12:19 PM on 05/07/2009
OK, I'm about to blow minds....

What about adding to the short list.....wait for it..........





JOHN EDWARDS




Nevermind he's jerk in his marriage, think about what the President said about empathy and not being from a ivory tower. Think about it.
12:46 PM on 05/07/2009
NOT!!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Daniel Carr
01:12 PM on 05/07/2009
If her health wasn't an issue, Elizabeth would be a much better pick. (I supported Edwards in 2004 and met his wife.)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
patrickmcdougal
03:44 PM on 05/07/2009
Well Daniel that sure convinces me!!
12:12 PM on 05/07/2009
Now we know why Jeff Rosen wrote the hit and smear piece on Judge Sotomayor. He's trying to help his brother-in-law become Solicitor General of the US. Glenn Greenwald lays it all out here:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/05/tnr/index.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paxhope
11:35 AM on 05/07/2009
Anita Hill,
Melissa Harris-Lacewell,
Rachel Maddow,
Jonathan Turley,
12:47 PM on 05/07/2009
R U serious...
01:58 PM on 05/07/2009
I've heard the Anita Hill recommendation before. I think that would be fantastic. Can you imagine? Ol' Clarence Thomas might actually quit. What an opportunity!
01:57 PM on 05/07/2009
Yes, Anita Hill. Maybe she can stare Thomas into retiring.
DoTheMath
We're outspent, but they're outnumbered
11:31 AM on 05/07/2009
I'll have to admit that when I first heard President Obama's empathy criterion I was skeptical. It seemed to violate the idea of making legal judgments on purely legal merits, using a strictly rational, rather than emotional, process. Then I remembered what I learned in graduate history classes 20 years ago. Nobody's impartial.

Even if a historian wrote an entire book containing nothing but historical evidence, not one statement that anyone could classify as an opinion, that historian would have to choose which evidence to include, how to arrange the evidence, how to present it. That doesn't mean it isn't important to separate fact from opinion or to analyze our own values or to attempt to weed out or counterbalance any biases that might affect our decisions.

It does mean that everything we do is filtered through ourselves - through our experience, our personality, our perspective. Supreme Court decisions for as long as the court has existed have been filtered through the people who made those decisions. President Obama is not suggesting that we change that. He's suggesting that we become aware of it.
11:19 AM on 05/07/2009
Al Gore.
12:47 PM on 05/07/2009
NOPE... Too Establishment...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AmeriGus
Wore On Terror
11:17 AM on 05/07/2009
From wiki:
Anna Diggs Taylor (born Anna Katherine Johnston in Washington, D.C., 1932) is a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. She graduated from Barnard College in 1954 and Yale Law School in 1957, and worked in the Office of Solicitor for the United States Department of Labor. In 1979, she was appointed to the federal bench by President Jimmy Carter, becoming the first black woman judge appointed to that Eastern District of Michigan.

She unequivocally told the Bush administration that they had to stop warrantless wiretaps immediately.
12:13 PM on 05/07/2009
She's too old, I'm afraid.
10:51 AM on 05/07/2009
AL GORE OR AL FRANKEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't help but fantasize picking one of these two people. It would even be good enough if their names were just in the running. I'd love to see the Repubs get all indignant and horrified! VP Al Gore is brilliant. Could you imagine the look on Scalia's face? He and the Repubs could relive the stealing of the 2000 (and 2004) election for many years. And Al Franken is certainly a man of the people and I say, "Repubs you have one of two choices: either seat Al Franken for Senator now or have him as a Supreme Court justice for LIFE!"