Who will the newest SUPREME COURT Justice? What is the Strategy?

[Soon]

Bill Maher: Why Can't Liberals Get A Liberal On Supreme Court? (VIDEO)

good discussion about atheism/religion too

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by MsDemeanor

TPM video about the softball pic YouTube- Cable News Wonders: If A Judicial Nominee Plays Softball, Does That Make Her Gay?

GeezUsFuckingchrist!

[Soon]

Sex Lives of Supreme Court Justices

By MICHAEL KINSLEY on May 18, 2010 9:28am

Now that the sex lives of Supreme Court justices have become grist for commentators, we are finally free to discuss a question formerly only whispered about in the shadows: Why does Justice Antonin Scalia, by common consent the leading intellectual force on the Court, have nine children? Is this normal? Or should I say "normal," as some people choose to define it? Can he represent the views of ordinary Americans when he practices such a minority lifestyle? After all, having nine children is far more unusual in this country than, say, being a lesbian.

Let me be clear: the issue is not the fact that Scalia has chosen to have nine children. That is his personal business. The question is whether he is an extremist advocate of the so-called "Nine Children Agenda." Can he deal open-mindedly with children’s issues when he has so many himself? Can he persuade his children to recuse themselves when appropriate (or, in the vernacular, "Just shut up, will you? I’m trying to write an opinion here. Sweetheart, could you please come and take him…stop climbing up my leg…watch it with that glass of water, buddy…no, that’s some condemned prisoner’s brief that daddy has to reject, so don’t …would somebody please take this kid…LOOK OUT for the… Jesus H. Christ, how am I supposed to get any work done"?).

Speculation is already rampant about why Scalia chose nine children over a more conventional lifestyle. Is he a sex maniac? That suspicion naturally arises. But perhaps once he started, he just never got around to stopping. Or maybe he just likes children. In recent days, Scalia’s friends have rushed to his defense, going out of their way to portray him as a model of sexual restraint. "Every Friday a bunch of us used to go down to this bar to pick up women," one of his college roommates recalls. "We’d always ask Nino if he wanted to join us, but he always said he was too busy studying. Frankly, we thought he was gay."

[Soon]

[AtLast]

Might be jumping the gun- but it seems to me that Obama will have another SC nomination fairly soon. Bader Ginsburg will probably leave the court within in his first term as well. What a powerful woman, indeed! ARGH... the mid-term elections are critical here, I think. My hope is that if Obama has this chance again, a more progressive thinking Justice would be terrific. With the political picture as it is...... not betting on it!

[Soon]

[UofMfan]

Judiciary panel OKs Elena Kagan for Supreme Court, AP

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee has voted to approve Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court.

The 13-6 vote sends Kagan's nomination to the full Senate, where she's expected to be confirmed as early as next week to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.

Just one Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, joined panel Democrats in supporting President Barack Obama's second Supreme Court nominee. A few more Republicans are likely to back her in the full Senate, where Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm her.

Most GOP senators argue that Kagan would put her political views ahead of the law. They also point to what they call her liberal agenda on such issues as abortion and gun rights.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Elena Kagan faces the first vote on her nomination to the Supreme Court before a Senate panel dominated by Democrats who are all but certain to support her. The only real question is whether she will get any Republican votes.

As the Senate Judiciary Committee met Tuesday, Sen. Jeff Sessions, the panel's top GOP member, said he would oppose Kagan, saying she has placed her politics above the law, lacks experience and has activist judicial heroes.

The Alabaman's announcement was no surprise, and most Republicans are expected to join him in voting "no" on President Barack Obama's nominee to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.

Still, a handful of GOP senators might back her, and Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm her.

The committee met Tuesday to take up Kagan's nomination after a week's delay at the request of Republican lawmakers. Democrats hold a 12-7 advantage on the panel.

Kagan, a 50-year-old New York native, has served as Obama's top Supreme Court lawyer since last year. Stevens retired in June after more than 34 years on the court.

So far, no Democrat has announced opposition to Kagan and no Republican has announced support. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is considered the most likely Republican on the Judiciary panel to vote for Kagan's confirmation.

Sessions offered extensive criticism of Kagan on Monday that left little doubt he would oppose her.

"I know that our nominee was articulate and had good humor and many thought she did very well with her testimony. I was not so impressed," Sessions said on the Senate floor. His remarks dealt mainly with Kagan's opposition to the federal "don't ask, don't tell" law on gays in the military.

Democrats hope to confirm Kagan before the Senate's August recess, well in time for the court term that begins in October.

Also Monday, Kagan responded to GOP questions that she would weigh stepping aside from hearing high court challenges to the new health care law on a case-by-case basis.

She was replying to a list of questions from committee Republicans about her involvement as solicitor general in defending the health law.

Kagan, Obama's second Supreme Court nominee, was solicitor general while the health law was being passed and as states sued the federal government in March to challenge its constitutionality.

She told Republicans in written responses to 13 questions that she had no involvement in developing the government's response to the lawsuit and never was asked her views or offered them.

She said she attended at least one meeting where the litigation was briefly mentioned, and the Justice Department filed a number of documents in the case during her tenure, but said she had no firsthand knowledge of any of the filings.

"I never served as counsel of record nor played any substantial role" in the case, Kagan wrote. "Therefore, I would consider recusal on a case-by-case basis, carefully considering any arguments made for recusal and consulting with my colleagues and, if appropriate, with experts on judicial ethics."

Republicans suggested in their questions that any involvement at all with the health care litigation should induce Kagan to recuse herself to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

[Soon]

Lindsey Graham Supports Elena Kagan, First Republican To Back SCOTUS Nominee

[Soon]

Sotomayor Guides Court’s Liberal Wing