New Chief Justice

[TexasTiger 13,016]

IF Rehnquist retires, whom would you want to replace him?

[Tigermike 3,053]

I don't think the dems would filibuster Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would they?

Or a better question would be who could President Bush nominate that the dems would not filibuster?

[TexasTiger 13,016]

I don't think the dems would filibuster Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would they?

Or a better question would be who could President Bush nominate that  the dems would not filibuster?

166054[/snapback]

Given the possibilities, I would probably prefer Gonzales. I think he's been a bit of a political lackey, but he was not a bad justice in Texas. Given a lifetime appointment, we'd see who he really is.

[Tigermike 3,053]

For some reason I think many of the anti abortion crowd might object to Gonzales.

[Tiger Al 0]

They will try to push an existing justice, probably Scalia or Thomas.

[Tigermike 3,053]

While we are on the subject of the New Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

"Was [Justice Clarence Thomas] the best that could be found? Now with nearly 14 years' hindsight, the answer is a resounding 'yes.' [He] was nominated to his seat on the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991. At the time, President George H. W. Bush said Thomas was the best nominee to be found. Many sneered, saying Bush had to appoint a black successor to the retiring, and black, Justice Thurgood Marshall. ... [since then], Thomas has emerged as an articulate and prolific writer of opinions, including many dissenting from majority decisions. It turns out President Bush was right: his nomination reflected not the color of Thomas' ears but what lay between them. ... The eminently qualified Clarence Thomas would be a great and fine successor to Chief Justice Rehnquist." -- Former NM GOP chief John Dendahl

[TrueBlue72 0]

I believe Thomas would be an excellent choice! But would the demoncrats filibuster until they were nuked???

[Piglet 0]

Bolton! Bolton! Bolton!

[TexasTiger 13,016]

I don't think the dems would filibuster Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would they?

Or a better question would be who could President Bush nominate that  the dems would not filibuster?

166054[/snapback]

Smart progressives would see a Rehnquist for Gonzales trade as a possible positive. In any event, absent rulings or writings seen as really extreme, I doubt they mount much of a filibuster for Rehnquist's replacement. O'Connor would be a different story. Stevens might be a war.