Justice Breyer set to retire?
That’s the report, anyway. It doesn’t come from the horse’s mouth, but it makes sense that he would leave when Biden (or his Democrat replacement) is president and the Senate is controlled by the Democrats. Breyer reliably votes with the liberal bloc, and so his retirement wouldn’t change the balance of the Court because of course Biden would appoint someone equally liberal – or more likely even further to the left.
Biden has previously “pledged” that he would appoint a black woman. And of course, that sort of promise has worked out so well with his vice president. Naturally, I’d prefer a less extreme-left candidate. But realistically, it probably makes little difference who he nominates because any liberal/left nominee – black or white, male or female, very extreme or not-so-extreme – would almost certainly be voting the same way on every issue or nearly every issue (that doesn’t hold true for justices appointed by Republicans, but I certainly don’t have to tell you that).
Last March, Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection wrote a post discussing some of Biden’s proposed eleven nominees. You can take a look at all eleven here. According to this tweet, the first tranche of his prospective nominees are all far left. No surprise whatsoever.
Speaking of surprises – will the Republicans in the Senate try to block whoever is nominated? These days, nominees are approved by a simple majority vote. That means if the Democrats stick together on this, it doesn’t matter what the GOP does.
I suspect that the Republicans in the Senate won’t choose that hill to die on. If they don’t fight it, though, their base might be angry. But if they do fight it, it gives Democrats their favorite rallying cry of “Republicans are sexist and racist!!!” – which they will employ no matter what, anyway.
Kamala Harris; solves the problem of fulfilling the promise and rids the Biden regime of it’s burden in the veep position.
Ayanna Pressley (one of the Four Horsewomen of the Apocalypse) is demanding that a black woman be chosen, and Biden will have no choice but to make good on his pledge; there is no doubt whatsoever that SCOTUS will soon have a black and female hard-leftist to replace Breyer, nor will many have the courage either to oppose her nomination or to criticize her. The only question is whether anyone will suggest the name of Michelle O.
Now reports are that Justice Breyer wasn’t planning to announce his retirement today, and is not happy with how this is being made public. Following on the fake Gorsuch-Sotomayor story at NPR, it seems possible the Supreme Court has a mole on staff. Whoever is feeding stories to the press should be identified and fired.
Lizzo for SCOTUS.
She checks off three necessary boxes: 1. Female 2. Black 3. Fat
It’s almost as if I’d read this before coming up with this theory myself: https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/01/06/lucas-bidens-presidency-needs-a-lifeline-and-her-name-could-be-hillary/
Sundance over at CTH has his money on Kentanji Jackson. I wouldn’t bet against him.
Well Merrick Garland certainly proved he is far left of any moderate, so I don’t expect any Democrat nominee to be any closer than Garland. They’ll say, “since we didn’t get Justice Garland, then we will put in who we really want.” Biden could just renominate Garland so the Democrats can poke Republicans and say Obama still got his guy, but that would derail the pledge and be a hard sell anyway.
There is reason to avoid putting in just a lefty simply because of how they vote. Things can get worse. However, I agree that Republican Senators will likely put up a weak assault and harrumpf. I’m sure Democrats will use the occasion to point out how grateful they are to have fellow Democrats like Sinema and Manchin around to appoint a right leaning moderate to the Court in a 53-47 bipartisan vote.
Just for the clown show of it; I’d love to see Biden nominate Kamala Harris for Justice. He lives up to his pledge while getting rid of her; and then it will be interesting to see the Democrats talk about how great she is with arctic poll numbers.
One of my commenters passes on this tidy nightmare:
Mike Austin January 26, 2022, 11:52 AM
A friend just texted me this scenario:
1. Kamala replaces Breyer.
2. “Big Mike” Michelle Obama replaces Kamala.
3. Biden receives the 25th Amendment treatment.
4. The Obamas are back in the White House.
My personal favorite would be Joe Rogan
The only question is whether anyone will suggest the name of Michelle O.
Mooch hasn’t practiced law since 1991 and allowed her Illinois license to lapse in 1993. She’s not the least bit interested in being an appellate judge.
Gerard Van der Leun:
I’m seen the same scenario proposed for Hillary Clinton, with “the Clintons are back in the White House.”
Neither would make much difference, since the people who are really in charge right now probably wouldn’t change nor would the policies change from what they are at present. The titular heads would merely be more well-spoken and cognitively intact than Biden.
A friend just texted me this scenario:
1. Kamala replaces Breyer.
2. “Big Mike” Michelle Obama replaces Kamala.
3. Biden receives the 25th Amendment treatment.
4. The Obamas are back in the White House.
A. Does KH get to vote on her own nomination?
B. Mooch doesn’t have any interest in holding office.
Art Deco:
I agree that holding office is just about the last thing Michelle Obama wants to do. She had plenty of opportunity to run for office before this, had she so desired. And she probably would have won.
I too think it likely that Biden’s handlers will nominate a radical.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if Manchin and Sinema pulled a McCain and voted against that nominee?
Heads would surely explode…
But if a radical does replace Breyer, wouldn’t their votes demonstrate a decided animus towards the very Constitution they swore an oath to uphold? In which case, might a republican congressional House majority vote to impeach and then convict in the Senate?
Oh, it will be a black leftist female, or the Dems would explode. But if it’s a person with a published history of anti-white bigotry, this could get really interesting.
Geoffrey writes; “In which case, might a republican congressional House majority vote to impeach and then convict in the Senate?”
I just weary of this endless clownshow.
“I suspect that the Republicans in the Senate won’t choose that hill to die on. If they don’t fight it, though, their base might be angry. But if they do fight it, it gives Democrats their favorite rallying cry of ‘Republicans are sexist and racist!!!’ – which they will employ no matter what, anyway.”
All true, unfortunately. Which is a good reason not to include that in their calculations. If you’re going to be called nasty names no matter what you do, you may as well do what you think is right.
The is no hill that Senate Republicans will die on. Not ever.
Biden will nominate a black woman, no question. He won’t want to supply the Republicans with ammunition for the election, so it will be someone without much of a public record or public statements. Manchin and Sinema will support her, and so will a handful of Republicans, but no more. She will then be a reliable left/liberal vote, probably to the left of Ginsberg on economic issues.
If Kamala goes on the Supreme Court then there is no Vice President to break ties in the Senate, so a new Vice President can’t be confirmed without at least one Republican vote. Unfortunately, getting that Republican vote won’t be hard. But maybe Pelosi will want to keep the Vice Presidency vacant so that she is first in the line of succession. (The replacement VP has to be confirmed by both Houses of Congress.)
Does Kamala have to resign her VP seat before she can be placed in consideration for the SC slot and give her testimony for the role?
It’s probably not going to be Harris, though. As much as Jill hates the woman, she’s an invaluable distraction – almost as incompetent as Joe, and always at a comfortable distance, allowing Jill to shift the blame attention behind the scenes and get on with her Presidency. Also, I doubt that anyone that isn’t currently occupying a judge position would be considered at all, unless they were some kind of high-credibility legal scholar.
Gerard Van der Leun:
The word “die” is of course a metaphor. In fact, there was a recent hill the Republicans of the Senate “died” on. The stance they took on the nomination of Merrick Garland by Obama to SCOTUS was quite radical and courageous, actually. It surprised me, but they hung tough on that one.
It is also of interest that so far they have been 100% united on not ending the filibuster, and also on their opposition to HR1. Both things are also somewhat surprising, given past defections and betrayals.
Aggie:
Plus, if Kamala herself has any say in the matter, I believe that she would MUCH prefer being VP to being a SCOTUS justice.
It doesn’t matter how leftist or radical Breyer’s replacement is. What matters is how actually smart they are. Putting a sub-par intellect on the Supreme Court matters both when it comes to persuading other Justices and to providing compelling arguments for your own side.
Mike
I’ma go with Sundance – Ketanji Brown-Jackson.
Did somebody say Hill to Die On?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbet_of_Montfaucon
Read the Les Rois Maudits series by Druon last year. And so should you all. It’s all very cheerful and uplifting!
Harris as VP doesn’t have to do any real work. On the Supreme Court, she’d at least have to read briefs. Yes, she’d prefer being VP.
Kate (7:05 pm), seems to me she can bluff/dodge her way through that as well.
The other justices will figure it out, but what might they actually do about it?
(Might they be willing to call her on it? If so, then what?)
M J R, you may be right. But would Harris actually want the job, whether or not she would actually do the job?
My pick is Barack Hussein Obama. Why settle for second best?
Think Big, People.
Gerard Van der Luen,
I too weary of the clownshow but consider the alternative; “There comes a time when a man must spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.”
As for, “The is no hill that Senate Republicans will die on. Not ever.”
Never say never. As neo points out, if sufficiently threatened they will indeed stand their ground. Even rats fight when cornered and are they not rats?
Kate,
Why would she need to read briefs? She’d just have a clerk write up her ‘opinions’ for her, not much difference between a speech writer and a law clerk when it comes to the crafting of words.
“My pick is Barack Hussein Obama.”
Too lazy, not enough time for golf and would interfere with his machiavellian maneuvering.
Kate (8:23 pm) asks,
“But would Harris actually want the job, whether or not she would actually do the job?”
These S.O.B.s play for keeps. They may make her an offer she can’t refuse.
(Merely one of a multitude of possible nightmare scenarios.)
Whomever Ze/Hir/Hirs is, I hope Ze is at least as good with numbers as Sonia.
Geoffrey Britain, reports are that Kamala is such an awful boss she might not be able to hire clerks to do the work for her.
Zaphod, unless BHO were to claim to be transgendered, he doesn’t qualify.
The problem is Kamala has to vacate the Veep before Michele Obama can replace her. They will then need 51 votes to get her in. Meaning 1 republican would have to vote for her.
Leaving aside the Veep vote part, I can see the appeal for Democrats to put Harris on the Court. However, I think Harris and Democrats can see the downside too.
I don’t believe anyone considers Harris competent enough to be on the Court, incuding Harris.
Even if she were willing to be on the Court, I doubt Democrats would want to have Harris on display as a fool over her head and a constant reminder of Democrat idiocy during the Biden years.
Biden will nominate a black woman, no question. He won’t want to supply the Republicans with ammunition for the election, so it will be someone without much of a public record or public statements. Manchin and Sinema will support her, and so will a handful of Republicans, but no more. She will then be a reliable left/liberal vote, probably to the left of Ginsberg on economic issues.
A very dangerous game for them to play.
A person with few public statements might be far more conservative than they think, or so loopy left that it comes back to bite them. If they want a safe left justice, then they need to pick one that has clearly signaled that.
Getting a clever, articulate, “correct” person from the very small pool that Biden has unwisely hitched himself too might prove more difficult than they think.
Charles Cooke had some ideas about how a far-leftie could backfire on the Democrats. A couple of people on the Open Thread suggested some of the same things.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/justice-breyers-retirement-may-not-be-all-bad-news-for-conservatives/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=right-rail&utm_content=corner&utm_term=first
More on the Princeton ballet program. Biden will employ similar ideas in picking the next SC justice:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/01/woke-ballet-at-princeton-part-two.php
Tribe says the VP can’t break a tie when Senate is in “advise and consent” role for Court.
“If you’re going to be called nasty names no matter what you do, you may as well do what you think is right.”
No, most Republican politicians will still try to do what they think will look good in the eyes of their enemies. Their constituents OTOH, can pound sand… their only function is to vote and be perpetually disappointed!
Where the hell are the Martians, anyway?!
An interesting scenario at RedState for the GOP to hold up SCOTUS nominee(s) they really don’t like – but hinges on 11 Republicans (including Lindsey Graham) “working together”, a sometimes doubtful prospect.
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/01/26/the-shortlist-for-scotus-and-how-the-gop-could-block-the-nominee-n513040
Regarding dying on hills … always good to remember Patton’s admonition (paraphrased) that you don’t win wars by dying for your country, you win by making the other poor bastard die for his.