What Kind of Leader for the High Court?

I would like to see a justice with some political experience who wil focus on getting five clear votes. I think the current court is too distanced from the realities of the legislative process, and I liked the fact that previously at least O'Connor had been a state legislator. The court has been too fragmented, deciding cases rather than setting precedent. A typical result has been a 5-4 decision with a majority opinion, a dissent, and three separate opinions either concurring but arriving by separate analsis, or concurring in part and dissenting in part. For those of us who have to practice, that leaves us with intellectual mush, and no clear guidance.

We simply need a new justice with a fine legal mind, previous judge experience and one who depends on the Constitution for rulings. In this past racism environment, the best candidate with the above qualifications should win approval, not based on sex, national origin or an other "ism". Why not go with the best candidate?

We need a person will the qualities listed above, but I hope that person is a Native American or Hispanic.

It's neither conservative nor liberal to apply the law to the facts and rule based on such an application. The new justice should have the mental capacity and legal background to hand down such rulings and leave changes in the law to those elected to promulgate such changes.

typical journalistic sloppiness. "philosopher" vs "conciliator" is a false dichotomy.

I hate to be the one to throw cold water on the liberals, but the person should be Honest, Understand the Constitution, and apply the law not make the law. We don't need liberals, or any other label that would cause them to lean one way or the other, just do an honest job of enforcing the law and not lead some political correct charge down to hell.

I think he should choose a minority woman with solid legal experience; someone who can speak to the many ways oppressed people can be oppressed and marginalized and who has the solid knowledge to back her opinions. I recommend Brandeis University law professor Anita Hill.

We need a Supreme Court Justice who will apply the law as written as long as it is constitutional. Justices are not empowered by the constitution to enact law.

I was 17 years old. My Dad being a WW II man, once said to me, "Checks and balances, is our country's strength. Absolute power in three branches hurts the nation’s collective reasoning. There should always be a stumbling block to stifle the popular party. Just ask Windrow Wilson. History will repeat. Thus, war…….

The next Supreme needs to be wiser rather than political. The constitution and bill of rights were not written to be politically interpreted. The Supremes were not ever supposed to make law, that is not in their list of responsibilities. The Supreme Court was never meant to be a diverse environment either. There are no rules for court members to be racially or sexually balanced. America just needs the best person for the job, and currently, some of the so-called list of candidates, would be pretty poor choices.

The next Supreme needs to be wiser rather than political. The constitution and bill of rights were not written to be politically interpreted. The Supremes were not ever supposed to make law, that is not in their list of responsibilities. The Supreme Court was never meant to be a diverse environment either. There are no rules for court members to be racially or sexually balanced. America just needs the best person for the job, and some of the so-called list of candidates would be pretty poor choices.

It is my belief and hope that for his first appointment to the Court, Mr. Obama will find someone of great intellect who will think deeply, then decide. It's the job and needed to offset the Scalia/Thomas approach of decide then think deeply about the justification.

Best of all, a minority woman who can rhetorically humble Antonin in deliberation conference. (OK, that's not emotionally or cognitively possible for him -- I'll settle for intellectually thwaaaaapppping him!)

In any case, go for brains - if you go for ideology, well, just remember that good conservative Republican Earl Warren!

Barack

WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

I'm amused by those who ask for great intellect as a requirement when Republican presidents choose partisans. Scalia,Thomas, Roberts, Alito (sp?) It's as if a person of intellect can't be a liberal in believing that the environment needs preservation, that the right to bear arms is not the only basic right of citizens, that the powerful are not privileged over the rest of us. One should remember the political decision that gave W. Florida and the presidency. Embarrassed by their partisanship, the republican justices limited their decision to that one election only. It was not to be applicable again.
Obama should appoint someone who is a fighter for truth and justice; that is, a liberal.

we certainly can't afford another scalia, alito, roberts and, especially, thomas. this coountry would be in turmoil for decades to come. and if intellect has anything to do with it how did thomas get approved for the court?? this man hasn't said anything since he's been appoointed. the supreme court has already done this country in. because they stuck their noses in where they don't belong, in 2000, we wound up with the likes of george w. bush - an incompetent person beyond belief.

When watching the Congressional Hearings regarding the Automobile industry "bail-outs" the Leader of Ford used the expression paradigm explaining a political and social concept back to the beginnings of the American Labor Movement that, "Unions are the Runiation of this Country". Would have to double check that as perceptions are a funny thing.

You know, even the term "Bail-out" can be misleading because for some, that is an investment for today and tomorrow which could build equity for the country in the long run.

I think Specter was the one who pointed out to us how "Justice" adapts to society over time such as "All Men are Created Equal" was an ideal expressed by slave owning Founding Fathers to the present, President Obama.

I could go on and on referring to Religious versus Civil Unions that guarentee personal liberties knowing that at one time a father told me I could not marry is daughter because I was not Catholic. Actually, she must have been spared of years of grief from me in my wild days.

Point here is that current day society is sort of flubbed up in my world, I must be getting old. Paradigms carried by Society, especially WallStreet, may be accepted as the "gospel" by certain entities on whole, but they may not be "true" or based on common sense nor may they be "the greatest thing since sliced bread" Consider the negative effects of derivatives and/or bundling that even got Mr. Buffett because everyone jumped on the Bandwagon ?

Wowo, I made a post without mentioning Dick What's his name once, that's improvement. Speaking of improvement, would it not be cool to read the "On Leadership" column without commercial interference, ;) ;).

Judges are supposed to be non-political so we need Judges appointed,who are totally Independent of any party.

Colin Powell and Arlen Spector deserve no respect from the Republican Party.Colin Powell has voted for Democrats at least 4 times He is a traitor or an independent.

He should just pick impartial judges, to avoid unfair advantages to either party, who will act on the constitution.