Bush's main legacy: The most conservative judiciary in memory

[BurtWorm]

Obama will have a lot of work to do to undo Bush's damage on that front (and every other, of course), should we be so lucky to elect him:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/us/29judges.html?hp

...

Earlier this month, Mr. Bush pointed with pride to his record at a conference sponsored by the Cincinnati chapter of the Federalist Society, the elite network for the conservative legal movement. He noted that he had appointed more than a third of the federal judiciary expected to be serving when he leaves office, a lifetime-tenured force that will influence society for decades and represents one of his most enduring accomplishments. While a two-term president typically leaves his stamp on the appeals courts — Bill Clinton appointed 65 judges, Mr. Bush 61 — Mr. Bush’s judges were among the youngest ever nominated and are poised to have an unusually strong impact.

They have arrived at a time when the appeals courts, which decide tens of thousands of cases a year, are increasingly getting the last word. While the Supreme Court gets far more attention, in recent terms it has reviewed only about 75 cases a year—half what it considered a generation ago. And Mr. Bush’s appointees have found allies in likeminded judges named by Mr. Bush’s father and Mr. Reagan.

Republican-appointed judges, most conservatives, are projected to make up about 62 percent of the bench next Inauguration Day, up from 50 percent when Mr. Bush took office. They control 10 of the 13 circuits, while Democrat-appointed judges have a dwindling majority on just one circuit.

David M. McIntosh, a co-founder and vice-chairman of the Federalist Society, said the nation’s appeals courts are now more in line with a conservative judicial ideology than at any other time in memory.

“The level of thoughtfulness among sitting judges on constitutional theory and the role of judges is higher than certainly any other time in my life,” said Mr. McIntosh, a former Reagan legal team member and Indiana congressman. “For somebody who has spent a lot of my life promoting those ideas, it’s very encouraging to see.”

The consequences of the evolving judiciary are only beginning to play out.

...

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Hopefully an Obama administration...8 years...will help to put a stop to this

trip back to the 13th Century in our judiciary. Having the Justice Department do what it is supposed to do will help also.
Obama will be in a position to appoint at least 2 Supremes...and with a majority in Congress he should be able to fill any vacant lower benches as well.

Patience...Patience.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

2. When McCain/Palin lose and are no longer in the spotlight

I predict that George Bush and the absolute abyss of destruction that he will leave will again become the main focus of criticism of the Democratic party. And rightfully so. There is bottomless mess to clean up. May Obama have the full eight years to correct this.

[blueclown]

3. Aren't there plenty of appeals and district court justices that Congress won't approve

until the next Congress session starts (in January)?

[Soup Bean]

4. Scalia and Thomas are much scarier than Roberts and Alito.

I've actually seen a well reasoned opinion or two from the Bush II guys. I may not like their interpretation, but that's why the Constitution can be amended. If something needs doing badly enough, the American People will do it, IF we still have a workable Constitution. I worry about us (America) from a mental health standpoint sometimes, but we will eventually figure out what the right thing to do is. Obama desperately needs to win in order for some of our older jurists to retire, and we will need a really solid Dem majority to replace Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, etc. with someone other than mealy mouthed centrists who've never had an opinion on anything in their lives.