Comments on: FDL Book Salon Welcomes Christopher Eisgruber, The Next Justice: Repairing the Supreme Court Appointments Process

By: emerson

emerson — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:57:44 +0000

So you would say that Pamela Karlan’s effect on Justice Blackmun was unusual? Also, many progressives are not thrilled with the selection of Sotomayor and would prefer a candidate such as Karlan. Is it impossible for a gay nominee to sit on the SC at this time, and when do you think it would become possible-and under what social and political conditions?

By: WarOnWarOff

WarOnWarOff — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:38:49 +0000

Which was really a SCOTUS clerk’s *misreading* of the opinion, which has resulted in the steady erosion of democracy ever since.

Funny how such things happen amongst teh law-talking guys. Or maybe not.

By: john in sacramento

john in sacramento — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:37:16 +0000

Your google works faster than mine ;-)

William Rivers Pitt also wrote a really good article on the Supremacy of the Super-Citizens (corporate personhood) which I mentioned here

By: Hugh

Hugh — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:34:58 +0000

The current court is slanted well to the right of where it needs to be

This gets to another point. The Court throughout its history minus the decade and half of the Warren Court has always been reactionary, favoring the powers that be over ordinary Americans.

By: Hugh

Hugh — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:31:52 +0000

they also have a responsibility to choose justices who will interpret the Constitution in a way consistent with the country’s best interests. That requires the President to develop, and act upon, his or her own controversial interpretation of the Constitution

Came late and still working through the comments but that sounds ominous, given Obama’s lack of interest in pursuing Bush era criminality, his support and use of the state secrets argument, his support of military tribunals, his support of indefinite detention (if courts do not give him the result he wants), and his attempts to move the legal blackhole of Guantanamo to Bagram where he hopes the writ of habeas corpus will not run.

By: Chris Eisgruber

Chris Eisgruber — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:31:37 +0000

Thank you all for your great questions, and for inviting me to participate!

By: Chris Eisgruber

Chris Eisgruber — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:31:14 +0000

Yes, I believe that the Senate does not have to defer to the president’s choice — though there are many pragmatic reasons to do so in particular cases, and principled reasons to do so when the president nominates a moderate (liberal or conservative) from his own party.

By: Chris Eisgruber

Chris Eisgruber — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:29:49 +0000

sounds right!

By: Rebecca Brown

Rebecca Brown — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:29:32 +0000

Your comment reflects a possibly controversial aspect of Chris’s book–he says that the Senate should feel free to reject any nominee that they think does not reflect a judicial philosophy that is in the country’s best interest. Chris maintains that the President’s role in nominating is not superior to the Senate’s constitutional role in confirming, and that both should take the job seriously and –correct me if I’m wrong, Chris– aggressively.

By: Chris Eisgruber

Chris Eisgruber — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:29:29 +0000

Thanks, Hugh. You put me in the somewhat unusual position of defending John Roberts (and Sam Alito), with whose jurisprudence I disagree! On the one hand, I think Roberts was wrong, and perhaps disingenuous, to say that his values did not affect his judging. On the other hand, I believe that he and Alito are both exceptionally smart, and that they are in fact offering good faith interpretations of the Constitution. But I again agree with you when you say that the confirmation process did a poor job bringing out just how conservative they are.

As for the Sotomayor confirmation, I join you in worrying that the hearings will again miss the main issue — her judicial philosophy — though I would not frame the question as whether she’s the best nominee. For example, Rebecca and I, and perhaps some senators, would prefer a nominee with experience in elected office — but I, at least, would not regard that as a reason for refusing to confirm the president’s choice.