Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Justice Pamela Karlan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:15 PM
Original message
Justice Pamela Karlan

Pamela S. Karlan, Professor of law at Stanford Law School
51 Years old.

Pamela Karlan, a well-respected liberal scholar, could also be a controversial, bold and challenging nominee for Democrats. "Bold," in fact, is a word she would likely embrace. In advance of the last nomination battle, Karlan said that Obama should take advantage of his approval ratings to make "a bold statement about what the Constitution means to him." -Time Magazine


Experience
  • Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund
  • Professor of law, University of Virginia School of Law
  • Founding Director, Supreme Court Litigation Clinic
  • Commissioner, California Fair Political Practices Commission
  • Law clerk to Justice Harry A. Blackmun of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • Law clerk, Judge Abraham D. Sofaer, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
  • Author, on Constitutional law and related subjects, well published including a recent book with Goodwin Liu detailing "a progressive vision of constitutional interpretation."


  • http://www.law.stanford.edu/directory/profile/32/


    Because the most important aspect of this nomination is not the confirmation, it is the nominee.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
    Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:22 PM
    Response to Original message
    1. She would make an absolutely terrific Supreme Court justice.
    Unfortunately, she is far too politically risky to be appointed.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:23 PM
    Response to Reply #1
    2. We have 59 votes and need 50, the only filibustered SCOTUS nominee was a criminal
    Edited on Fri Apr-09-10 08:23 PM by usregimechange
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:32 PM
    Response to Reply #1
    4. Democrats had more seats the the GOP does now and Alito and Roberts were confirmed
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:35 PM
    Response to Reply #4
    5. Because the Democrats didn't vote as a bloc against them like they should have
    but in the context of an appointment of a liberal like Pamela Karlan, a liberal whose liberalism is a matter of clear and extensive public record that can be cited in grandstanding speeches, it's doubtful that the 41 Republicans (and conceivably even a few Democrats) in the Senate will make the same mistake.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:37 PM
    Response to Reply #5
    6. We need one Republican to vote against her and for cloture
    Dem Senators will not break, I don't think they have on any judicial vote during his Presidency.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:53 PM
    Response to Reply #6
    9. You're probably right. We could likely pull off 60 votes for a cloture vote for Karlan.
    Reluctant Democrats could be brought in line, and Republicans from socially-liberal states like Collins and Snowe could perhaps be swayed. But it would be a long and politically difficult confirmation battle, and there would be a substantial risk of failure (which would be a political disaster). I don't see Obama wanting that kind of fight the summer before midterm elections, especially after the intense partisan division over health care reform.

    And that stance, while debatable, is not unreasonable. It takes a majority to get things done on the Court. What matters most, then, is not how liberal a particular justice on the liberal wing is, but how liberal the deciding vote--in this case Justice Kennedy--is. As long as Obama appoints someone to the left of Justice Kennedy, then, as he is virtually certain to do, the Court's ideological balance will not shift much. In that context, the most sensible course of action seems to be what he is likely to do: appoint a moderate liberal without a strong public record on controversial questions.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 09:57 PM
    Response to Reply #9
    10. Maybe the public wants someone who will fight for what they believe in verse run and hide?
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:44 PM
    Response to Reply #5
    7. Sotomayor no votes:
    NAYs ---31 (31 Republics)

    Barrasso (R-WY)
    Bennett (R-UT)
    Brownback (R-KS)
    Bunning (R-KY)
    Burr (R-NC)
    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    DeMint (R-SC)
    Ensign (R-NV)
    Enzi (R-WY)
    Grassley (R-IA)
    Hatch (R-UT)
    Hutchison (R-TX)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Kyl (R-AZ)
    McCain (R-AZ)
    McConnell (R-KY)
    Murkowski (R-AK)
    Risch (R-ID)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Shelby (R-AL)
    Thune (R-SD)
    Vitter (R-LA)
    Wicker (R-MS)
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:32 PM
    Response to Original message
    3. She's got my vote.
    Not that they'll count it. But she's far superior than any names I've heard from the corporate media or out of the Chicago branch office of Message Discipline LLC.

    As Rachel Maddow just pointed out in detail, Justice Stevens - regardless of who appointed him - has been "THE" Liberal on the court in recent years. To replace him with a lukewarm "centrist" would be a crime. The President needs to nominate Karlan, and let it be known that any "Democratic" senators standing in her way can count on exactly ZERO help in the next election.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 08:47 PM
    Response to Original message
    8. Go ahead and filibuster her nomination, but make them stand for it
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 10:03 PM
    Response to Original message
    11. Her co-author Goodwin Liu would certainly work for me too. n/t
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 10:09 PM
    Response to Reply #11
    12. That would cause Sessions head to explode
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 10:10 PM
    Response to Reply #12
    13. That should be a litmus test for all nominees. n/t
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-10 10:28 PM
    Response to Reply #13
    14. Really, if it doesn't happen, you haven't made the right choice
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jun 14th 2024, 01:28 AM
    Response to Original message
    Advertisements [?]
     Top

    Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

    Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
    Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


    Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

    Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

    About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

    Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

    © 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC