SCOTUS Guessing

Interesting post for the day here at SCOTUSBlog. From the vantagepoint of a potential Clinton Presidency (Re-Presidency?), I've got to think that two names jump out here: Leah Ward Sears and Sonia Sontamayor. I think the presumptions Tom Goldstein makes in selecting the list is correct - there will be some amount of pressure to name younger judges, likely another female, and very likely non-Anglo. I have a hard time seeing a member of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals come up first, though. There's a long list of wacky rulings that have come from there and it strikes me as fish-in-a-barrel easy to beat them up once the first retirement kicks off this news cycle (Ben Winograd has a bit on that topic here). I'm not partial to political backgrounds in SCOTUS appointments, but Jennifer Granholm and Deval Patrick might be strong possibilities as there from that list.

Goldstein sees one of the 9th Circuit judges coming first, then Patrick, then the dean of Harvard Law School. I'm hoping that's wildly off. A follow-up post alters the prediction to: Sears, Merrick Garland, and Teresa Roseborough (assuming an appointment early in a Dem term) ... which strikes me as more likely (sub Deval Patrick for Roseborough and I think that's it). If someone from the 9th Circuit is chosen, I just hope they're a damn good judge with an even better record.

They've got a similarly obligatory GOP list up as well. John Cornyn and Priscella Owen are once more on the long list. Owen warrants a "No" vote in my book. Cornyn does as well, but I think his timeline is more dependent on whether or not he can get himself into the White House than the Supreme Court. As soon as that plan gets put into a blender, it'd be no surprise to see the loony right start chirping for his name anytime Scalia, Souter or Kennedy get the hiccups.

Bias aside, I think that a Republican followup to Bush would be pivotal for progressive legal principles in the court. Bush has, believe it or not, made better nominations to SCOTUS than he has for the lower levels. But the battles over some of those lower-level judges (cough*Priscella Owen*cough) have pretty much blown open the barn door for what passes conservative litmus tests. I don't see a President Romney, Giuliani, or Thompson feeling as if they have to restrain any nutiness on the part of a future SCOTUS nominee. In fact, the nuttier the better. How better to get a good reaction on the part of Fox News broadcasters and National Review scribes?