Hillary Clinton for Supreme Court Justice?
Buzzflash - a blog that supports Barack Obama - has published an article that raises an interesting question: if Hillary Clinton loses the race for the Democratic nomination, and it seems she will, wouldn’t she, from a Democratic perspective, make a great Supreme Court Justice?
You might ask why I would be so supportive of Hillary Clinton serving on the Supreme Court when I have been so critical of her record. Well, the question answers itself. It is her politically calculated record during her Senate term, and the positions that she supported during the eight years in the White House that she counts among her 35 years of experience of which I have been most skeptical as a progressive.
But a seat on the Supreme Court would free Clinton to put her keen intellect to work in resolving Constitutional issues that desperately need to be saved from a wrecking ball by a Court that has veered dangerously to the right. It would allow her the potential to leave an enormous legacy, without worrying about how to vote because of the next election coming down the line.
And it would, of course, also unite the Democratic Party. In short, from a liberal perspective I think that this makes a lot of sense. Obama should certainly consider doing this and Hillary should consider talking to Obama, mentioning that she might drop out and endorse him if she gets something like this in return.
Personally, of course, I think that HRC wouldn’t take the ‘country’ back to the original meaning of the Constitution at all, only with regards to wiretapping, etc. but not with regards to what the Constitution says about just about every other issue, but that’s an entirely different matter.
Hmmm, I don’t really think she’d make too good of a Supreme Court Justice myself. This has nothing to do with my opposition to Clinton as a candidate, I also think Obama would not be appropriate for such a role, and that’s counting he taught Constitutional Law.
A Supreme Court Justice should be someone who has dedicated their whole lives to the LAW, not politics. As such they should be an attorney or a judge, or otherwise show amazing qualities to make them equivalent to either position. I wholeheartedly hope that a potential President Obama would shy away from making what would be an entirely politically expedient move, we’ve had quite enough of that for the past 7 plus years, thank you.
I agree Claudia, I wouldn’t even want to see her as state court judge. Even though she was a lawyer, politcs is her arena. I don’t even think any of the other current justices were in a polical office (other thank being legislative assistants or a Special Counsel of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee)
Ridiculous, IMO. Talk about a SCOTUS nominee who wears her politics on her sleeve-can you even imagine the uproar on the left if a GOP president nominated anyone who was as clearly a partisan, and who had no experience with Constitutional law?
Also Michael, what do you mean by the "take us back to the original meaning of the Constitution"? To what degree have we strayed? What do we need to get back to? Just wanted to get clarification on that.
Neither Mrs.Clinton or Mr. Obama seem to be good candidates for the SCOTUS,because, as everyone above notes, they are political people first and always. I think the country has seen more than enough of politically motivated appointments who have proven to be problematic, from both Democratic and Republican administrations. If there is any reason to believe this, it is another good reason to vote for McCain. This looks like it is going to be a mud-wrestling match of a campaign.
She’d have zero credibility as a justice and anybody who put her up for the position would be laughed into submission. Just look what happened to Harriet Meirs, who has consistently practiced law her entire life and, for all intents and purposes, is vastly more qualified for the job than Clinton. I agree with Orson. Let’s get fewer politically motivated appointments, although I think that could happen with either a Dem or Repub in the White House. It just has to be the right Dem or Repub.
I think Clinton would be a terrible Supreme Court Justice. But not because she has been a politician.
For those who think any politician would be bad on the Supreme Court, try a little research on a) William Howard Taft, or b) Earl Warren. Both, arguably, were better as Supreme Court Justices (Chief Justices, actually) than they were as President or Governor. But to be a Supreme Court Justice requires some dedication to the Law, not just an enthusiasm for personal power.