Litigation

A Different Perspective on Our Supreme Court Saga

By Peter Hardin

After a week of feverish speculation about the Supreme Court’s future direction, President Obama’s pick to succeed Justice John Paul Stevens, and whether a fierce confirmation battle will erupt in Washington, it’s time to take stock.

What better way than to ponder The Economist’s commentary, irreverent and across-the-pond? It’s refreshing and provocative, whether or not you agree. Here are key points from “The next Supreme Court justice: Barack Obama’s nominee to replace Justice John Paul Stevens will be brainy, young and controversial:”

• IMPORTANCE. “[For] both sides, the battle is of the utmost importance. For Mr Obama, it is a chance to shape American society long after he leaves office. Justice Stevens is nearly 90; his successor could be 40 years younger. For Republicans, it is a chance to make the Democrats look like bong-puffing, jihadi-hugging radicals before the mid-term elections in November.”
• GUN-LOVERS: “The nominee will of course be grilled about gays and guns…A bare 5-4 majority on the current court manages to impose a highly pro-gun line. So gun-lovers will watch Mr Obama?s nominee nervously, especially if he picks Harold Hongju Koh, a long-shot candidate who once gave a speech titled: ‘A world drowning in guns’.”
• ON EMPATHY: “Mr Obama once said that his ideal judge would show ‘empathy’ for the poor. Polls suggest that most Americans would rather their judges upheld the law dispassionately. It is a debate worth having, and it has only just begun.”

You can read the latest articles from the U.S. news media, and commentary, in today’s media report found in Gavel Grab.

Full post as published by The Gavel on April 16, 2010 (boomark / email).