Google News has 6,531 news articles about the Supreme Court vacancy with the word “Elena Kagan” in them. I guess that means the Solicitor General has a media lock on the nomination.
Obama may well pick her, but I’m skeptical, due to my careful study of the Rule of Geithner, which states: If your high-level position requires confirmation, you must be caught with a live boy or a dead girl in order to lose it.
Here’s the Kagan corollary: You are less likely to be nominated for a new position if your current high-level position requires confirmation.
The prospect of hours of questioning on how the Solicitor General nominee feels about any law longer than 4,543 words, not to mention whether she agrees that all amendments with “teen” in their name are null and void, will at least make Obama think twice about Kagan’s nomination.
DougJ
Good point.
Bobby Thomson
I see your Geithner and raise you a Johnsen, a Ginsburg, and a Bork.
liberal
I don’t see why Kagan will take longer than anyone else. She’s less liberal than many of the other candidates. More importantly, the Republicans will oppose anyone he nominates.
WereBear (itouch)
Gee, last time the Republicans came out against empathy.
What about this time? Anti-fluffy kitten cuddling?
dmsilev
Of course, any Supreme Court nominee will have to answer those asinine questions, along with questions so asinine that mere mortals can not hope to spoof them. Having to get a replacement Solicitor General through is just a drop in the bucket by comparison, so it may not be much of a factor in the selection.
dms
Redshift
Very good point. Our lazy political media can’t imagine anything other than the conventional wisdom that an official who has already been confirmed is harder to block, because they can’t go beyond square one and see that another official would have to be confirmed in an environment in which Republicans are holding or filibustering everything.
I’d like to think that this could be a teachable moment about why the outrageous GOP obstruction on confirmations matters, but I despair of the Beltway press being teachable…
MikeJ
@liberal: It’s not that Kagan will take longer, it’s that you have to replace Kagan and go through hearings on whoever will be the new solicitor general. Easier to keep her where she is and nominate somebody who won’t leave a vacancy that has to go through senate confirmation.
Comrade Mary
@liberal: No, what will take long is finding a new Solicitor General to replace her.
Mark S.
@liberal:
I think mistermix means that Obama will have to also nominate a new Solicitor General.
On the other hand, Graham seems to like Kagan. Factor in Snowe and Collins and she might have a relatively easy confirmation, despite GG’s insistence that she is to the right of Scalia.
General Egali Tarian Stuck
Yes, but there is also the Ginsberg Rule, or, don’t answer any motherfucking questions you don’t want to, because a case on it might make it to the SC one day, and because, well, just because you’re an asswipe fucktard.
I am pulling for Diane Wood, btw. Only because GG likes her, so she must wear Che jammies and we are in dire need of someone to chase Scalia around with a pitchfork .
BTD
If the Solicitor General’s job was really critical to policy and/or politics, you might have a point.
But the reality is SG’s office practically runs itself and whether Kagan is replaced in 2 months or 5 hardly matters.
Kagan was named the SG precisely so she could be named to the SCOTUS imo.
I think the logic of this post fails in that it overstates the significance of the SG position and the political and policy importance of who will succeed Kagan as the SG.
Kagan’s confirmation hearings as SG were important because Kagan was a likely SCOTUS nominee, not because Kagan was going to be SG. No one would have really cared much otherwise.
And no one will care much who replaces Kagan.
Zifnab
@liberal: What Mary and Mark said.
danimal
The Constitution has 4543 words in it, but the Bible has many, many more words. Are the 10 Commandments still valid? Does God need an editor?
/wingnut logic
Mary
Any federal appeals court judge nominee would require Senate confirmation as well, so your corollary knocks out most of the possible SCOTUS nominees.
Zifnab
@BTD: No one cares who heads the TSA, and yet that guy has been locked out of office for, what? A year now?
danimal
Stuck,
I read in TPM that Justice Souter is predicting that HCR may come up before the Supreme Court. I think he made the statement so that a nominee could say that he/she can’t comment on a topic that may come before the court.
licensed to kill time
Well, as long as Obama picks someone who will unite the country. We need a Uniter, not a Divider!
Wait a sec, we had one of those once…erm, never mind.
jl
Glad this post mentioned Geithner, so my comment is not totally off topic.
More news from the alternative reality crowd, what the GOP ‘means’ (loosely speaking) when it says that the financial reform bill perpetuates bankster bailouts.
This is rich. You people gotta read De Long’s excerpt:
Why Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) Should Resign Today – Sen. Bob Corker: ‘The bill as it now is written allows … bailouts in perpetuity’
From Brad DeLong, April 15, 2010
He says, to Ezra Klein:
EZRA KLEIN: Was Sen. Mitch McConnell correct? Is the Dodd bill, as currently written, a permanent bailout?
BOB CORKER: I’ve cautioned against hyperbole. But the fact is that the bill as it now is written allows numerous loopholes that allow a situation where you could have bailouts in perpetuity. It’s a fair statement…
Okay. So there we are. And so Ezra probes:
EZRA KLEIN: I think it would be useful for us to get very concrete here. So what is a “bailout,” exactly?
BOB CORKER: A bailout is when the government comes to the aid of a company after the company begins to fail. The government comes in and creates mechanism for its survival.
EZRA KLEIN: My understanding is that the bill’s resolution authority mandates that a company gets liquidated if it has to tap into the $50 billion resolution fund. Shareholders get wiped out. Management gets wiped out. The company gets taken apart. Am I wrong in any of that?
BOB CORKER: That’s exactly right. What you’ve just said is true…
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/04/why-senator-bob-corker-r-tenn-should-resign-today—-sen-bob-corker-the-bill-as-it-now-is-written-allows-bailouts-in.html
Klein’s interview with the Corker is at
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/04/sen_bob_corker_the_bill_as_it.html
Mary
@General Egali Tarian Stuck: “We are in dire need of someone to chase Scalia around with a pitchfork .”
Wood and Scalia taught together at the University of Chicago. Apparently they were on the Academic Rules committee together and butted heads on all important issues like how many credits a law student should be able to get for taking foreign language classes at the College. I took a class with her a few years ago and she would regularly tell stories that started out “When Nino and I were on the rules committee together…”
Good times.
Menzies
@Mary:
This sounds absolutely priceless. Nino is such a dick I can’t imagine anyone getting along with him on any kind of continuous basis.
Elisabeth
The Economist had an article on Kagan that Sully linked to. The author of the article made the point that Justice Kagan would have to recuse herself from any case that involved any work she had done as SG. That would leave a 5-3 Conservative majority on dozens of cases.
mistermix
@Mary: I take your point, though I think the SG is a higher-level position that a federal judge.
@BTD: Isn’t the SG the #2 official at DOJ?
ellaesther
Every once and awhile, I come here and read a post that makes me go: Huh! I have no idea what this person is referring to in what I am certain is a very dry, humorous tone.
This is one such moment.
Must catch up on reading.
General Egali Tarian Stuck
@danimal: Well, the wingnuts have promised to litigate it’s constitutionality that has already begun, so Souter is spot on, and I agree it was beneficial a former justice voiced it.
The past two decades, and even before, confirmation hearings have been mostly free of substance and are more dog and pony shows of questions asked and not answered.
It is the background research that is the hearing and whether or not the president does his homework better than the opposition for any time bombs present. Or at least time bombs that can or cannot be defused.
Mary
@Menzies: It was priceless. The class was a seminar called something like “Federal Law from the Judge’s Perspecitve,” but my friends and I just called it “Story Time with Judge Wood.”
Lev
I actually think it would be smarter to keep Kagan in reserve, in case one of the more conservative justices retires. The right evidently likes her okay.
I wrote a post on my blog if you want to click through about why Jennifer Granholm is the most likely pick for the job. Basically, it says that Diane Wood and Merrick Garland are both a bit too old to be picked (both are 58-59), Napolitano would cause a circus because of Homeland Security, and Kagan could cause lefty drama. Granholm is young, media-savvy, has plenty of legal experience, and has a good narrative. I think all the angles line up for her in a way they don’t with the other possibilities.
General Egali Tarian Stuck
@Mary: GO Diane!!
Lev
@mistermix: Solicitor General is the #3 person at Justice, behind the AG and Assistant AG, I think.
arguingwithsignposts
This is slightly OT, but can someone explain to my why the FUCK Dick Armey is being interviewed by Andrea Mitchell as a “Tea Party” leader? He’s a former congressman and a wealthy sonofabitch. Shut the hell up, you hypocritical bastard. And Mitchell, WTF are you doing giving this shitbag a microphone?
/rant
Joe L.
If Liz Cheney likes Kagan I have to wonder just how much balance she would bring to a pre-FDR supreme court.
BombIranForChrist
Who was the leader of the pack before Obama picked Sotomayor? Sotomayor or someone else? I can’t remember. I blame beer. And liberalz.
IndyLib
@jl:
Delong linky no worky.
General Egali Tarian Stuck
@BombIranForChrist: If I remember correctly, Sotomayor was always at the top of a shortlist, mainly because Hispanics were not represented on the court and women under represented. Plus, she had an absolutely full and sparkling resume.
Allan
@arguingwithsignposts: Is he sober?
Wait, it’s after 9 am, what am I saying…
BombIranForChrist
@General Egali Tarian Stuck:
Right on. I seem to remember that vaguely, but I just wasn’t sure. Thx!
Citizen Alan
The Geithner Rule is certainly something to take into account. If I were Obama, I would give serious thought to nominating someone completely outside the federal judiciary, like a highly respected and intelligent member of a state supreme court. I wonder if this is why Leah Ward Sears is so prominently mentioned.
BTD
MisterMix:
By the ORg Charts, Number 3.
In the real world of the Justice Dep’t? The SG has nothing to do with the rest of the Justice Dep’t. They do one thing – argue appeals for the US government.
kay
@arguingwithsignposts:
I think it’s great, and (this may be a first) I applaud Andrea Mitchell for tracking down and interviewing the power behind the Tea Party “movement”.
It’s who they should have been interviewing all along. She’s telling the truth.
Sentient Puddle
@jl: Ugh. I called it when I read this interview this morning, saying that that one line is all anyone would pay attention to in the interview. Pulling up the quote…
Part left out:
That’s right, everybody calm down and stop laying eggs for a second. Corker isn’t just making up bullshit like McConnell is.
To put it into more context, if you read Ezra’s interview of Mark Warner, Corker’s objection is pretty clear (and reasonable): currently, there’s too broad of a scope on the definition of what can be bailed out. Something in the auto industry currently qualifies, which doesn’t really fit into the scheme of financial reform. So Warner and Corker are working to clarify this point.
Let’s be sure we got all our facts straight before getting our panties in a twist, people.
arguingwithsignposts
@kay:
I’ll have to listen to it again, but I must have missed the part where she called him out on his shit.
Joseph Nobles
I’m still holding out hope for Elizabeth Warren. I caught her yesterday on Washington Journal, and she could charm a smile out of Louie Gohmert. Plus, she’s smart as a whip and empathy cubed. I’d love to see her in Brandeis’ old seat.
But this Diane Wood is sounding interesting for her history with Nino. And truth be told, I think Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been working on the old boy. According to the recent C-SPAN SCOTUS documentary, she and Nino have had a close friendship all this time. If you ever see the hint of amused exasperation when Nino moans about the direction of the Court down a path he’d rather not walk, you’re probably seeing him pull his punches because of Ginsburg.
KCinDC
The media seem to be following the Sotomayor script. We’re now at the stage of publishing unsourced gossip about the nominee. Nice touch that CBS is using our old friend Ben Domenech, a fellow of unblemished character.
kay
@arguingwithsignposts:
I’m sorry. That isn’t what I meant. What I meant was it’s a huge improvement over pretending that “ordinary grass roots” Americans financed and promoted this thing.
Let’s interview the tea party leaders. By all means. I insist.
Dick Armey. That regular American.
Delia
@arguingwithsignposts:
He’s the one who was running up the median teabagger income levels in the NYT poll the other day.
BobS
@Joseph Nobles: Another Elizabeth Warren supporter here. A voice for the consumer is sorely needed among the corporate attorneys on the Supreme Court.
jl
@Sentient Puddle:
No, I think you are wrong. Let us take this slowly. I will highlight the relevant portions that show that Corker is playing games
Klein: Was Sen. Mitch McConnell correct? Is the Dodd bill, as currently written, a permanent bailout?
Corker: I’ve cautioned against hyperbole. But the fact is that the bill as it now is written allows numerous loopholes that allow a situation where you could have bailouts in perpetuity. It’s a fair statement.
If you are so gullible that you think that is a nuanced introduction to the subtleties of distinguishing between, say Ford, GE. or GM the manufacturing companies, and Ford, or GE or GM the financial credit behemoths, I would have a nice real estate deal I would like you to consider.
I do not see how anyone can honestly say that one letter, syllable, word, phrase or sentence in McConnell’s speech was honest about anything.
Sentient Puddle
@jl: And he said it’s easy to fix, and Warner has indicated that they are working on fixing it. This isn’t a case of me reading too much into nuance. It’s me reading the entire damn thing.