ConfirmThem

I only wish the White House would have the guts to nominate Janice Rogers Brown to the Supreme Court! Although I think JRB would probably side with the liberals on some Fourth amendment issues, in general I think she has the right originalist/strict constructionist perspective. I also think she would be much more willing than Roberts and Alito to abandon bad precedent.

would be a good source for Stevens rumors, provided we're not just playing a game of telephone here. hard to tell how many of these reports are just picking up the ball from an original (right or wrong) source, and how many are independent and thus more likely to be true.

Brown, Kavanaugh, and Kiesler would all be heavyweights on the Supreme Court.

Kavanaugh's second confirmation hearing was one of the worst I have ever seen. He could barely make an articulate statement because he was so nervous. I think the Dems could easily ambush him during a SCOTUS confirmation hearing. On the other hand, Keisler was as smooth as silk in his presentation.

I don't see any reason why Kavanaugh would get the pick ahead of at least a half dozen other white males.

Drudge briefly mentioned the Stevens rumors a minute ago (emphasis on briefly, don't know if he had already said something about it)

Janice Rogers Brown has always been my number one choice for the Supreme Court (though I'm thrilled with Roberts and Alito). JRB is the right choice, not just constitutionally, but politically as well. This is the point that more people need to get on board with. She would be confirmed. Dems will not be able to railroad her the way they did Roberts and Alito. Their treatment of Alito went beyond the pale and chastened them at the end, and it would be even more so if the Dems were seen as attacking a distinguished black woman. In the game of politics, you can't do it. Nominate JRB and she will be confirmed!

I am a bit worried that we've got a rumor moebius going, but it IS wonderful to know that JRB is likely under serious consideration (Insider wasn't wrong about everything! :) ), and this is the most excitement 'round here in months!

The Senate will remain in the hands of the GOP. I predict we end up with 54 seats and will actually be the better for it in some ways. My predictions: Wins in Virginia, Tennessee, Montana, and Missouri. Losses in Rhode Island, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. BUT pickups in Maryland and New Jersey.

I feel about 90% certain about Steele though I'm 50-50 on Kean, though I think we'll win both. New Jersey is such a heartbreaker, but we've come very close before with worse candidates and far far less money (see 2000). In this race, we've got about as good a candidate as we could hope for, a bad Democrat, and parity in spending.

So, the GOP returns 54 and no Chafee which almost completely makes up for the loss of the incomparable Rick Santorum. Santorum is one of the finest men in Washington today, and losing him is a real shame that reflects very badly on Pennsylvania. But 54 without Chafee is more valuable than 55 with him. Later Lincoln!

Anyway, the 54 Republicans will confirm Bush's next Supreme Court nominee. And, hey, maybe the nuclear option comes back on the table. Chafee and DeWine won't be there to stop it, and Mitch McConnell might know how to twist enough arms to get it through. Besides, I think Ben Nelson might vote for it. (Now if only we could get him to switch parties.)

Then I wonder if Jan Crawford Greenburg will say anything about it. I must say, she is quite fair and pretty accurate about things.

_In a world full of twists and turns, the ultimate twist...is a straight line._

Chafee voted for JRB, but not for Alito, Pryor or Owen, IIRC. Worth mentioning. Defo an "inside spitting out, outside spitting in" conundrum, like Specter as Chairman.

Nelson was the only Dem to vote for JRB, and she got all 55 Repub votes too.

Dave II, I love this quote: "The anti-JRB hackjob on this page will not stand." :-)

Well, I've finally been inspired to register. Though I must say the old format was much better, and the previous thread would probably have 200 responses and this one already 50 had the old format remained.

On more substantive matters... I, too, worry that the repetition of the vacancy rumor is the mere echoing of a single -- quite possibly false -- rumor. That being said, the people at Human Events presumably have decent sources. And it's not unbelievable that Stevens retire under a Republican.

The US News and World Report rumor is interesting, and somewhat believable. We all know Bush's penchant for cronyism, which would explain Kavanaugh -- an otherwise inexplicable choice. If the US News rumor was a mere regurgitation of tired rumors, the runner-up would've been Luttig, McConnell, Sykes, Williams, etc. The further away from conventional wisdom it gets, the more apt I am to believe it.

That being said, I think executive power questions will give the WH pause before nominating the likes of JRB. Such concerns are why I'm hopefull that unknowns Callahan and Mahoney are not options.

For those interested, JRB gave the commencement speech at the UCLA Law School this past May. Though it's hardly a politically driven speech (and it certainly should be nonpolitical given the event), it looks like Judge Brown has little interest in kowtowing to liberals, even after living in DC for a while now and even when in front of a certainly left of center audience at UCLA.

http://www.law.ucla.edu/home/News/Detail.aspx?recordid=630

You listed us as winning West Virginia. Do you have some sort of inside info we don't know about?

Kavanaugh would get the pick because Bush knows him better than any other potential SCOTUS pick out there, since he's been an assistant to him his entire presidency. Bush knows him to be conservative, principled, and with a brillant legal understanding, so it makes absolute sense that Bush would trust Kavanaugh as a SCOTUS pick this early. Add to that he'd be putting a guy just over 40 (he's 41 right now) and it's a no-brainer.

Dave II, I agree with you on almost all your picks, though I just don't know about MD and NJ. I want to believe Steele can win (I don't like Kean but he's better than Menendez), but those two states are so liberal it's hard to be confident.

Santorum will be a big loss in the Senate. I'm hoping perhaps Alberto will resign and Santorum could then be AG, or if Rumsfeld gets booted perhaps Santorum could be made Defense Secretary. Or he could wait for President Romney and serve in his administration.

Although I understand the White House reasoning behind nominating Kavanaugh (the president knows him personally, and he's both young and conservative), I think his nomination would be a huge mistake. He is not a very good public speaker and really fumbled his way through his second confirmation hearing. Specter had to prompt and prod him too many times in order to get rather incoherent answers. I think he would play quite poorly on television and be an easy target for the Dems.

Actually BoBo, everything I've ever heard or read about Kavanaugh has said that he is a fantastic public speaker. It appears he just had a bad day at his second hearing, for whatever reason, perhaps just a little fear over having to go through such an unprecedented event.

Is that he'd be an excellent Supreme Court justice. :-)

that Bush will go with either a Female or a Hispanic. It seems odd that he would go with a white male given the general climate in Washington.

If the justice to leave is RBG then he has virtually no choice, but to nominate a woman.

Dubya obviously has more latitude to replace a white male with another white male, for sure.

If he goes with a Hispanic, I think the order should be

1. Miguel Estrada
2. Ted Cruz
3. Emilio Garza
4. Raoul Cantero

If woman, then

1. Edith Jones
2. Janice Rogers Brown
3. Edith Brown Clement
4. Priscilla Owen
5. Diane Sykes
6. Karen Williams

What search criteria do I use to pull up *JUST* JRB's DCC opinions, both the ones she wrote & the ones she concurred/dissented, w/o 1000's of others? Sorry, I'm a non-lawyer.

Also, can anyone do a quick n' dirty listing of how she voted viz. the other judges on the DCC?

Nobody spend a lot of time on this, and it's all likely for naught as JPS eez strong like bool, but it sure is fun!

On a somberer note, reading btwn the lines of the Human Events rumor, I wonder if they weren't obliquely referring to RBG. She certainly never has appeared healthy. Obvo, I don't like her jurisprudence or politics, but I have huge respect for her intellect & accomplishments. Guess we'll see.

As far as I know, JRB has not dissented in any of her DC Circuit opinions. That makes any Democrat statement to the effect that her jurisprudence is out of the ordinary moot.

Mark my words, Bush will not nominate anyone who has made direct statements challenging Roe on its merits. That eliminates Raoul Cantero, Emilio Garza and Edith Jones from your list.

Bill, the best search term appears to be "Judge Brown." I'll make a note of that in the post. Make sure you select the "opinions" database.

I had the same question as Bill.