Speculation about who President Obama will suggest as the next Supreme Court Justice continues to ramp up (of course). Here are a few articles and some questions to ponder as we get nearer to the news:
Changing the Whole System
Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin recently wrote an editorial piece about how Supreme Court justices have it too good. Balkin praises Justice Souter not only for his work on the Court, but also for his voluntary retirement at the age of 69. Balkin contends that increasing life expectancy and the increasing prestige of the job has changed the institution so that most justices now serve as long as they possibly can. Balkin argues that more regular rotation would better reflect viewpoints of a changing world; he then describes how we could implement such a rotation system.
A question I had after reading it was this: for people looking for greater diversity on the Court, gender or otherwise, should efforts be focused on changing the whole system? Instead of focusing on how to get a specific spot filled, should people be looking for more regular rotation so that more opportunities exist for greater diversity?
Secret Lives
Several people have clued me into an article from Slate titled "An Unnatural Woman: The secret life of a Supreme Court short-lister." As pointed out in an earlier post, several of Obama's rumored picks are single women. A few openly gay, and a few not. The article questions several consequences of these facts, including the speculation surrounding these women, whether it does matter, and whether it should matter.
One perceptive observation comes at the end of the article--it speculates that often for women to achieve great success in the legal world, they have to make more personal sacrifices. Being on the short-list was probably achieved at a cost, but one that might not pay off. "And so the list is a Catch-22: The choices a woman may make to achieve stunning legal success are the same ones that may also someday preclude her from a Supreme Court confirmation."
Who's in the Running?
Yesterday the media was abuzz with the fact that some source revealed that President Obama has narrowed down the potential nominees to about half a dozen, and a decision could be out by the end of the month.
The list includes: federal appeals court judges Sonia Sotomayor and Diane Wood, and Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, and California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno.
1 comment:
Thanks Laura,
In reference to the article by Professor Balkan, I definitely agree that efforts should be focused on changing the system. If rotations happened more frequently, I believe the confimation process might take on a more civil tone (which partially addresses some of the concerns voiced in the Slate artice, i.e. that women are too sane to subject themselves and their families to a virtual witchhunt). Part of the reason there is so much clamor surrounding vacancies is that they are rare, and once filled, the new justice will likely be on the bench for 20 plus year, far longer than any President.
In addition, I think it's important to keep in mind that diversity can mean so much more than sex-based and race-based diversity. There is also something to be said for generational diversity.
Post a Comment