President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace Justice David Souter is the type of decision we have come to expect from the Obama administration. It involved important political considerations and will likely prove to be good enough for liberals but not off-putting for conservatives.

Let me start off with the assumption that she will almost certainly be confirmed. Her background is relatively moderate and despite a few minor slip-ups, she has maintained a relatively non-controversial paper-trail. Elementary political considerations also mean that Senators will vote in favor of Judge Sotomayor in order to please their own individual constituencies.

I’m not surprised that the President selected such a home-run candidate as his first nominee. For better or worse, judicial nominees have been a losing proposition for recent Democratic presidents and this President was cognizant of that trend. The President hasn’t made any high-profile moves in his first few months in office and he has treaded lightly in the most controversial arenas, preferring to keep his head down in areas like same-sex marriage and abortion. Choosing a nominee like Pamela Karlan or Kathleen Sullivan would have mean jumping head-first into those issues and this President has not shown any inclination to do that. Especially in light of the imminent decision of the California Supreme Court on Proposition 8, the nomination of either of those two candidates would have sparked another potentially-fatal reaction from the right.

Judge Sotomayor likely won the nomination of the likes of Judge Diane Wood and Solicitor General Elena Kagan because of her compelling background story and the presumptive ease with which she will be confirmed. Of all the nominees that had been mentioned, Sotomayor was likely the easiest pick and that fact did not escape the White House.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • Frequency of Consecutive Opinions Release Days: I've taken a look at the number of opinion days in a given week from OT06 to OT10. In other words, I've taken a look at the number of times ...
  • Advocates Arguing from Private Practice (OT 2000-2011): In my last post, I provided a list of the top Supreme Court advocates of the twenty-first century who had never worked in the Office of the ...
  • Who is Roy W. McLeese?: This morning, as I was perusing next month's hearing list, I noticed a name I wasn't familiar with: Roy W. McLeese. It isn't unusual to see ...
  • Early OT09 Stats: I've finally finished the first edition of my OT09 statistics. First, the links: Term Index and Term Opinion Breakdown. Honestly, the nam...
  • Solicitor General Record During OT08: I compiled the SG's win-loss record during OT08 in four different scenarios: When it took part in a case as Petitioner, when it took part as...