Souter To Retire: Thanks For Waiting, Jerk!

Given that he's only 69 and has said he wanted to retire early, obviously he could have gone a year ago. I guess he wanted to ensure another liberal got his slot.

NPR has learned that Supreme Court Justice David Souter is planning to retire at the end of the court's current term.

The court has completed hearing oral arguments for the year and will be issuing rulings and opinions until the end of June.

Comments

[Bob]

Yeah, what gall for a Republican-appointed justice to not step down when it could have been guaranteed that another Republican appointee would take his place. Life is so unfair when it doesn't work out to the advantage of Republicans. Goddamned Republican appointees who don't put the party ahead of everything else.

[LOL]

Sweet sweet wingnut tears.

[Xerocky]

pfft, like Democrats never complain about how unfair things have been for them. Give me a break.

[Lala]

Souter Retiring: Ayers, Wright Downplay Rumors
by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace ·

(2009-05-01) — As speculation runs rampant about who President Barack Obama will pick to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, two long-time associates of the president have downplayed rumors that their names might be on the president’s short list.

the rest is at http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=3626

[anon]

Actually, supreme court justices are supposed to be 'party neutral'...but of course that all evaporated a couple of decades ago. True, Souter has proven to be a bit too liberal for my tastes...I can only imagine the kind of far left nut job that Obama will be appointing, someone who will make Breyer and Ginsberg look middle of the road.

Hopefully Kennedy will choose to hang on for another 4-8 years or you can totally, completely, 100% forget about saving this country in the short or the long term, if Kennedy goes and is replaced by an Obama justic3e that will give the liberals a 5/4 majority and the nation will run rampant with political correctness and affirmative action and criminal coddling.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Life is so unfair when it doesn't work out to the advantage of Republicans. --"

Can you shrink that down and put it on a bumper sticker? I think we've got the 2010 campaign theme.

[Xerocky]

"Can you shrink that down and put it on a bumper sticker? I think we've got the 2010 campaign theme."

Typical Liberal, doesn't understand the DIY eithic. "can you put that on a bumper sticker FOR ME, I need help...wha wha wha!"

[nishna]

Of the eight remaining justices, six were nominated by Republican presidents. Only Ginsburg and Breyer are Democratic nominees.

Don't forget, Up or Down vote or its the Nuclear Option!

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Don't forget, Up or Down vote or its the Nuclear Option! --"

I think the refrain now is "Balance of Power! Balance of Power!"
One might point out that elections have consequences, but then the chant changes to "Secession! Secession!"

[LOL]

the fact that Souter is considered some awful liberal is just proof of how far to the right most conservatives and republicans have become.

[Bob]

"the fact that Souter is considered some awful liberal is just proof of how far to the right most conservatives and republicans have become."
--LOL

Yes, can we please hear a refrain of, "He didn't leave the party, the party left HIM!" In the end, will there be any conservative buzz-phrases left that they won't have had to eat?

[Clayton in Mississippi]

Souter spared the nation and the Republicans a bitter openly partisan fight by waiting until after the election to resign. Does anyone really believe that the Senate would have approved anyone that George Bush nominated to the Supreme Court, especially after 2006? Partisan rancor would have resulted in either Bush being forced to nominate someone from the Democrats' "approved list", or the position remaining unfilled due to "procedural delays" and filibustering by those confident that a Dem President would replace Bush. We were spared that bloody battle and now a left-leaning Justice will now be replaced by a left-leaning Justice with no effect on the Court's political spectrum.

And, Yes, I would have preferred that Bush appoint the replacement but I don't believe it could have been possible.

[anon]

I don't buy that Souter spared the nation anything, since he's only 69 he could have easily lasted another 4 or 8 years.

He is resigning now specifically because [for whatever reason] he wants Obama to appoint his successor.

[Roy Mustang]

He is resigning now specifically because [for whatever reason] he wants Obama to appoint his successor.

It is a slap in the face to the people who got him his seat. Of course, who needs an understanding of courtesy when you have handed down morally righteous judicial fiats for the past 20 years?

[Mickey C]

"the fact that Souter is considered some awful liberal is just proof of how far to the right most conservatives and republicans have become."

I'm not sure anyone here has quite tagged him as "some awful liberal." Nor does he or his Supreme Court decisions PROVE how far to the right Conservatives have (be)come.

The simple gist of the matter is that he was a Republican of the first order while still in New Hampshire law, and right up to the time he actually took a seat at the SC bench. From that point forward, he categorically removed any and all pretense of being even remotely "conservative" and secured the liberal mantle. The mantle which, by the way, wasn't his to grab - seeing as how the elder Bush had mistakenly thought him to be what he presented himself to be while in the New Hampshire judiciary.

That line of thinking, as it turns out, couldn't have been more wrong, and we've now spent the better part of 19 years hoping the guy that was appointed to the seat would someday find his original bearings.

Alas, it is not to be.

Good riddance, Mr. Souter. And thanks for pretending to be something you never really were. Guess the joke was on us after all, huh?

[Mickey C]

"One might point out that elections have consequences, but then the chant changes to "Secession! Secession!"

Clever. But wrong. Only one Governor has had the audacity to call for a such a change, and agree with him or not, he's still a party of "one."

[Bob]

There was a study of Supreme Court justices done by Cass Sunstein fairly recently:

http://washingtonindependent.com/350/judicial-partisanship-awards

Without considering Alito and Roberts because of their still-too-recent tenure, they found Clarence Thomas to be the most PARTISAN of the justices, and Scalia and Thomas to be the most ACTIVIST. Souter was found to be one of the least partisan and most restrained of the justices.

I think that time will undoubtedly show Roberts and Alito to be relatively high on the partisanship scale as well. So as far as partisanship and activism goes, Republicans have already left their mark on the court. It would be a bit hypocritical to pre-emptively wail about ANY appointment Obama decides to make, considering the recent history of Republican appointees.