There’s been way too much news this past week. Between Katrina and Rehnquist/Roberts, I can’t read the newspapers and blogs fast enough. And I’m pissed that The Note has been on vacation for two and a half weeks. Mark Halperin and his staff will have a lot of catching up to do when they return tomorrow.
It’s not totally suprising that Bush has moved Roberts’s nomination to the Chief Justice position. He’s practically in love with Roberts, and he wasn’t going to name someone who wasn’t a white male as Chief Justice, but he wasn’t going to nominate a white male for the second vacancy. So O’Connor’s replacement will probably be someone non-white or female or both.
On the other hand, Bush has never acted in line with political predictions.
Interesting fact: since Roberts is only 55 only 50 years old, he could wind up having one of the longest Chief Justiceships in American history, second only to that of John Marshall. [Update: or even the longest!]
The switch of Roberts to the Chief Justice’s seat changes the dynamics of Bush’s two appointments. As SCOTUSblog writes, “The nomination of a doctrinaire conservative to replace the Chief Justice could have been explained as ideologically neutral for the Court, as the new nominee would not move that seat to the right. Moving Judge Roberts to the seat of Chief Justice, by contrast, opens up again the debate over what Democrats will describe as the ‘O’Connor’ seat — that of a moderate conservative.”
There’s going to be pressure (again) to replace O’Connor with a moderate. But hasn’t that ship sailed? What if Roberts actually turns out to be the moderate of the two appointments? Ugh. It’s still possible.
At any rate, here’s hoping that Chief Justice Roberts will be presiding over Bush’s impeachment trial soon.
Is it just me, or does it seem unfair for the person who’s least experienced in that court to get the position of Chief Justice? In other words, shouldn’t one of the justices who’ve already been serving the court for a long time get that seat? It’d be like the president of a division of a big company leaving and his position being filled by some completely new person instead of the vice president. Seems really recless (at least from my limited point of view).
Actually, Bart, most Chief Justices have not been on the Court before being appointed. Rehnquist was an exception in that regard. But it will be odd that Roberts will be the youngest member of the Court (or one of the youngest, depending on who the other nominee is).
You know, O’Connor retired the day that the Note sent out its previous “on vacation – ttyl” post. When they came back a week later, they picked up with no apology for dropping the ball on a huge news story. Silly holidaymakers.
In any event, I’ve been desperate for its guidance, too. I’m looking forward to tomorrow.
I think the perception is worse than the reality–most people only remember the Rehnquist appointment, if even that, and they only see that Bush has looked outside the court and chosen a young, very conservative man without much experience as an actual judge.
While it wasn’t difficult to accept that (after getting over the initial shock that he’d actually chosen a white male), his sudden elevation to Chief Justice is a lot to take, since we haven’t even finished debating whether he’s an appropriate choice for the court at all.