Jump to content


Replying to William Rehnquist


Post Options

  • Anti-spam: complete the task
  or Cancel


Topic Summary

TheProfessor

Posted 08 September 2005 - 09:18 PM

I'm not as concerned about Roberts being a chief justice as I am whomever is going to be nominated to O'Connor's spot.

Alberto Gonzalez has been a name in circulation, and my bet is that he's even more conservative than Roberts. Bush wouldn't have re-nominated Roberts to Chief Justice unless Roberts was likely to be confirmed as Chief -- meaning, he has to appeal to both Democrats and Republicans alike. He's under a finer microscope than the other Jusice that Bush nominates will be.

So, with all that in mind, I think the most conservative Justice appointed by Bush will be the one that he names NEXT -- not Roberts.

You're inferring another vacancy is likely, so who's gonna snuff it or retire?

You mean, other than O'Connor, who has already said she's retiring?


<crickets>

football_fan

Posted 07 September 2005 - 03:10 AM

You're inferring another vacancy is likely, so who's gonna snuff it or retire?

Let me explain. Sandra Day O’Connor had announced her resignation from the U.S. Supreme Court on July 1st. John Roberts was originally nominated to replace her, but then Chief Justice Rehnquist died. So President Bush re-nominated John Roberts to be Chief Justice.

Sandra Day O’Connor has agreed to stay on until Bush finds a replacement for her, so the pressure is off him for the time being. Albert Gonzalez is one person who has been rumored to be under consideration to replace her.

Captain Oates

Posted 06 September 2005 - 06:51 PM

I'm not as concerned about Roberts being a chief justice as I am whomever is going to be nominated to O'Connor's spot.

Alberto Gonzalez has been a name in circulation, and my bet is that he's even more conservative than Roberts. Bush wouldn't have re-nominated Roberts to Chief Justice unless Roberts was likely to be confirmed as Chief -- meaning, he has to appeal to both Democrats and Republicans alike. He's under a finer microscope than the other Jusice that Bush nominates will be.

So, with all that in mind, I think the most conservative Justice appointed by Bush will be the one that he names NEXT -- not Roberts.

You're inferring another vacancy is likely, so who's gonna snuff it or retire?

Supreme Court vacancy.

It is explained in paragraphs 6 and 7. (Actually, sentences 6 and 7!)

Tempus Fugit

Posted 06 September 2005 - 06:39 PM

.

TheProfessor

Posted 06 September 2005 - 02:26 PM

I'm not as concerned about Roberts being a chief justice as I am whomever is going to be nominated to O'Connor's spot.

Alberto Gonzalez has been a name in circulation, and my bet is that he's even more conservative than Roberts. Bush wouldn't have re-nominated Roberts to Chief Justice unless Roberts was likely to be confirmed as Chief -- meaning, he has to appeal to both Democrats and Republicans alike. He's under a finer microscope than the other Jusice that Bush nominates will be.

So, with all that in mind, I think the most conservative Justice appointed by Bush will be the one that he names NEXT -- not Roberts.

Posted 05 September 2005 - 07:12 PM

Well then, I must say I'm not shocked to hear about his death. Knew it was coming this year.

I don't like the idea that Bush wants Roberts as the new chief justice but Bush is an idiot anyway.

Hip hip for deathlist.

Teddy

Posted 05 September 2005 - 12:45 PM

It looks like President Bush is not wasting anytime to extend his influence on the U.S. Supreme Court.  The Chief Justice position is usually reserved for someone who has already served on the Supreme Court for many years.  Instead, Bush has gone outside the court and has nominated conservative judge, John Roberts to replace William Rehnquist as Chief Justice. 

If Judge John Roberts gets comfirmed as Chief Justice, President Bush will have absolute control over the U.S. Supreme Court.  :) 

Bush names Roberts top US judge

Sorry to disagree with you here FF.

First off, it is the exception, rather than the rule, that the Chief Justice comes from the sitting members. Of the 16 Chiefs since the Court was established (in 1789), only 3 were sitting Associates (White in 1910, Stone in 1941, and Rehnquist in 1986).

Secondly, given that Rehnquist was a conservative justice, first appointed by Nixon and then elevated by Reagan, the oppointment of a conservative replacement will not alter the balance of the court.

And of course, the appointments never work out the way they were planed. Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren as a conservative Chief Justice, and he promptly turned out to be much more liberal and reforming judge, overseeing the major civil rights rulings during the 50's and 60's.

Chief Justice of the United States

football_fan

Posted 05 September 2005 - 12:23 PM

It looks like President Bush is not wasting anytime to extend his influence on the U.S. Supreme Court. The Chief Justice position is usually reserved for someone who has already served on the Supreme Court for many years. Instead, Bush has gone outside the court and has nominated conservative judge, John Roberts to replace William Rehnquist as Chief Justice.

If Judge John Roberts gets comfirmed as Chief Justice, President Bush will have absolute control over the U.S. Supreme Court. :)

Bush nominates Roberts as chief justice

millwall32

Posted 05 September 2005 - 07:21 AM

My first ever real DL death. How cool.
Well played everyone.
Condolences to the family and all that.

Zeppelin

Posted 05 September 2005 - 03:11 AM

It has been decided that William Rehnquist to be buried at Arlington Cemetery, on Tuesday September, 6. :)

Review the complete topic (launches new window)