November 08, 2006

Supreme Election

If the Democrats win the House or Senate the most momentous change could not be in terms of foreign or economic policies but in terms of the kind of nominations that George Bush can made. There are rumours flying around say that John Paul Stevens who was 86 in April could retire after these elections. Were he to do so and were the Democrats to capture the House or Senate, Bush would not be able to nominate a Sam Alito to the bench but would have to choose a more moderate or circumspect candidate. Stevens is not the only one, despite the fact that he is the oldest justice, but there are others both in the Supreme Court and on the Federal Courts who are approaching either retirement or death. That ultimately could have a longer term effect on America given the fact that Supreme Court Justices seem to stay around than anything else.

4AM The Democrats have won the House of Representatives at least so this prediction now looks to have come true!


Anonymous said...

Good work Graachi. I knew that you would be monitoring the situation on this. Hope all well. B

Gracchi said...

Thanks B, yeah I was monitoring it all night long- so much so I forgot that only the Senate gets to do the Supreme Court as a friend phoned me up to tell me

Anonymous said...

Looks like the Dems have won the ssenate too now, though.

And Rummy has gone - rejoice! Rejoice!


Gracchi said...

They have, and Rummy has gone to be replaced by a sinister spook who wrote a book defending the use of covert power and was involved though never proved to have done wrong in Iran Contra- Oh well lets hope he does better. His details are here

edmunds said...

On a minor factual note-only the Senate has to approve the nomnination of a federal judge- the house has no constitutional role in their appointment (or indeed any executive appointment save vice-president)

How is Alito not moderate or circumspect " where has he pushed his political agenda rather than what the law says?

Don't you think a spook should support convert action?

He was not even indited in Iran-Contra-and given the conviction rate for that (well below Starr's) that is a suggestion how innocent he was!

Gracchi said...

Yes as for spooks and covert action that's true. Iran-Contra I don't know enough about his involvement that's why I just mention it.

Thanks for the federal judge point- perils of blogging early in the morning I'm afraid