Banking Law

Two Lawyers in a Pod[cast] consider who should replace Justice Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court when he retires after the end of the current term, and offer up a candidate that at first glance might not seem quite as good a fit as, say, Harriet Miers, but upon further consideration fills the bill. The prefect replacement? You guessed it: American Idol judge Paula Abdul.

Think about it.  For one, she meets all of the demographic criteria.  She?s a woman.  She?s relatively young.  And I think she?s a person of color.  In fact, given the ambiguity in her ethnic identity, she?s the ultimate ?minority? justice.  At present, Obama is getting pressure from both blacks and Latinos to appoint either the third African-American justice or the first Latino justice.  With the right accent, Paula could pass muster with both constituencies.  In fact, given her last name, Obama could probably pass her off as Arab American as well.  As a result, appointing Abdul to the high court would free up the position for white men for the next half century.

Second, she meets the next most important criteria for a Supreme Court nominee ? no clear record on where she might rule on the issues.  In almost a decade of watching American Idol, I have yet to hear her give an opinion on abortion, stem cell research, the continuation of college football?s BCS format, or any of the other important issues likely to come before the Supreme Court in coming years.  And while people might naturally assume that she is liberal, no one would go so far as to call her an ?idealogue.?  After all, to be an idealogue would require that she actually have ideas from time to time.

Third, the President recently said that he wanted his nominee to have ?empathy.?  Well, no one has more empathy than Paula Abdul.  When the other judges are harshly deriding a contestants performance because it was ?pitchy, dawg? or ?cabaret and indulgent,? Paula always goes out of her to find a positive note.  ?Well, at least, you remembered most of the words and you even got a few notes in tune too.  Good job!?  This type of empathy would certainly come in handy when the Court hears cases involving the handicapped, the mental ill, and that adorable 16-year-old Somali pirate.  As an added benefit, I?m sure that lawyers appearing before the Supreme Court would appreciate a counterbalance to Scalia?s normally gruff demeanor.  I can hear Justice Abdul now.  ?Tony!  Stop it!   You big meanie!?

The author concedes Abdul's complete lack of legal knowledge, but asserts that no one's opinion on the court matters anymore, other than Kennedy's. He's got a point. Plus, even she came off as less intelligent than a box of rocks, you have to remember that the Supreme Court once ruled that the state of Illinois could bar women from becoming lawyers because, after all, women were made by our creator with intellects inferior to those of men (Bradwell v. Illinois, 1873). I mean, she could base her decisions on the color of the appellants' lawyers' ties and still hit the bullseye half of the time.

The clincher, though, and the attribute that outweighs all others, is the obvious one.

And, if you?re still not convinced, just ask yourself when was the last time the Supreme Court had a really top flight choreographer to help them prepare for their annual holiday gala.  It?s been a while; at least, since Justice Frankfurter left the Court in 1962.  As I see it, the person who can stop Justice Thomas from doing the ?funky chicken? deserves a job with lifetime tenure; to say the very least..