Town Square

Post a New Topic

Supreme Court Justice Souter To Retire

Original post made by Sharon on May 1, 2009


In coming years, Souter's replacement may well provide the fifth vote for:

" the imposition of a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage;

" stripping “under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance and completely secularizing the public square;

" the continued abolition of the death penalty on the installment plan;

" selectively importing into the Court's interpretation of the American Constitution the favored policies of Europe's leftist elites;

" further judicial micromanagement of the government's war powers; and

" the invention of a constitutional right to human cloning.

American citizens have various policy positions on all these issues, but everyone ought to agree that they are to be addressed and decided through the processes of representative government, not by judicial usurpation. And President Obama, who often talks a moderate game, should be made to pay a high price for appointing a liberal judicial activist who will do his dirty work for him.Web Link





Comments (16)

Posted by The Real Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 1, 2009 at 8:02 am

Sharon--fanning the flames of hysteria again? And Souter's replacement may do just the opposite. Justices have been known to disappoint their supposed base. I am sure Souter's moderate rulings have been a disappointment to conservative republicans


Posted by Go Obama, a resident of Downtown North
on May 1, 2009 at 8:20 am

And Obama will have the chance to appoint several more, in all probability.

That's good, as it will be a chance to balance out all the nuts put on the court by the rightists.



Posted by The Real Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 1, 2009 at 8:49 am

Sharon states:
"And President Obama,who often talks a moderate game, should be made to pay a high price for appointing a liberal judicial activist who will do his dirty work for him"

This sounds like a threat against the president to me. The Secret Service should be notified and they will certainly get to the bottom of this


Posted by Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 1, 2009 at 9:49 am



Talk about hysteria--

"Obama should be made to pay a high Political Price price for appointing a liberal judicial activist who will do his dirty work for him"

As in the mid term and full term elections.


Posted by The Real Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 1, 2009 at 9:54 am

Sharon--too late to try to explain your comment. The Secret Service will look into your threatening posts and deal with them appropriately.

Anyway, Obama has not yet said who he will appoint in place of Souter and you are fanning the flames and threatening the president.


Posted by weirdo, a resident of Charleston Gardens
on May 1, 2009 at 12:49 pm

The Real Sharon, you are a nut.


Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on May 1, 2009 at 1:11 pm

The Real Sharon is enjoying herself, methinks.

Looks like Obama may appoint a woman. And at this rate a whole lot more--Souter's not even one of the several judges over the age of 70.

I'm sorta hoping that Obama appoints someone who will give Scalia an apoplectic fit--a twofer.


Posted by Gary, a resident of Downtown North
on May 1, 2009 at 1:18 pm

OhlonePar,

I think he should appoint Orrin Hatch. That would give YOU an apoplectic fit!


Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on May 1, 2009 at 1:37 pm

Gary, Gary, Gary,

I've been a liberal through Reagan and Bush II--I've already been biding my time waiting for things to change. My composure is well-earned. Orrin Hatch is aged, those of us who follow the courts know that age is a big factor.

So, I will enjoy this. I think Obama, given his constitutional law background, will look for a real legal scholar--sort of the anti-Clarence Thomas. A nice young anti-Clarence Thomas. And he'll get what he wants with this Senate.

I look forward to a transformation of the court if Obama wins a second term with Roberts overseeing a liberal court much to his consternation.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 1, 2009 at 3:13 pm


I had presumed that it doesn't really matter who replaces Souter.
He was a nonentity.
Bland, nothing. Barely noticeable.
His reliably liberal vote would be replaced by another reliably liberal vote. Yawn.

But wait one minute

I see thing will get interesting after all------

It's been noted on a couple law blogs that Specter's defection could actually make it harder for Obama to nominate candidates, because in order to break a filibuster in the Judiciary committee that nominees have to go through, at least one minority member of the committee must consent.
Specter is on that committee and as a Republican was the most likely minority member to do so.
But now he's not in the minority any more so he can't.
The other members are: Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, and Tom Coburn.

As I understand it, at least one of them will have to consent to break a filibuster in the committee.

Interesting, if true. It would be an amusing coincidence, that's for sure.


Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on May 1, 2009 at 3:19 pm

Sharon, let's see if I got this straight--on one hand your nattering over the need for the popular vote on big issues and on the other your hoping for the obstruction of a shrinking minority party on the other.

I suspect, though, that Specter's committee role is set for the time being.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 1, 2009 at 3:35 pm



Can't we just give Scalia two votes?

Reaction was swift to the news of Justice David Souter leaving the Court:.
The other 8 Justices: "Who?"

Democrats" "Sweeeeeeet"

President Obama: "Oh, great! Who do I have to please now?"

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee: "Sweeeeeeet!"

78% of the American Public: "Who?"


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on May 2, 2009 at 4:15 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

If the Secret Service investigates Sharon's comment about political retribution, I would ask only where they were the last 8 years of Shrub bashing.


Posted by The real sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 2, 2009 at 7:36 am

Walter--Sharon's original comments contained a threat against Obama. She then tried to modify it so that it looked like she was referring to political retribution. Too late.
the Secret Service will imvestigate her comments and deal with her in the appropriate manner. end of story.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of Midtown
on May 2, 2009 at 8:18 am


[Obamas ] first priority for a Supreme Court nominee remains "empathy," which translates into someone who will help the court "stand up" for the murky and vaguely communist concept of "social and economic justice" as David Axelrod once put it.
It's not enough to interpret the laws correctly, Obama's judges must make sure that the outcome does not "protect the powerful and leave ordinary Americans to fend for themselves."
And the ends will justify the means.Web Link

The Obama White House thinks it had a good week: Specter, Souter, and media fawning over the enchantment of Obama's first 100 days.
But to us, this looks like irrational exuberance.
This could prove the most bloated moment of the Obama bubble.
The Obama administration took a wrong turn in the war on terror and is continuing down the road of disarmament in that war (the anti-torture memos and their fallout).
It overreached with respect to the private sector (mishandling the attempted Chrysler bailout).
And it continues to make a spectacle of its self-indulgence and narcissism (the Air Force One flyover of Manhattan and Joe Biden's swine flu comments).Web Link


Posted by jacob, a resident of Stanford
on May 2, 2009 at 5:20 pm



I am sure the candidates will have to be approved by Rev Wright and his gang.
what a frankenstein monster we have created, with the best of intentions as always.
The road to hell is always built with best of intentions-- read Hayek Web Link

He saw it in the USSR and with the NAZIs in Austria and Germany.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

The dress code
By Jessica T | 25 comments | 2,037 views

September food and drink goings on
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,421 views

Two Days to Save This Dog?
By Cathy Kirkman | 15 comments | 1,270 views

It Depends... Disguising Real Characters in Fiction
By Nick Taylor | 0 comments | 420 views

Twenty-five years of wedded bliss
By Sally Torbey | 0 comments | 101 views