Bombshell: Souter retiring

posted at 10:25 pm on April 30, 2009 by Allahpundit

The rumors were swirling this afternoon and now NPR confirms. Farewell at last to Bush I’s worst mistake.

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

Souter is expected to remain on the bench until a successor has been chosen and confirmed, which may or may not be accomplished before the court reconvenes in October.

At 69, Souter is nowhere near the oldest member of the court, but he has made clear to friends for some time now that he wanted to leave Washington, a city he has never liked, and return to his native New Hampshire.

I wonder if he saved this as some sort of “100 days” gift to The One or whether he waited until the Democrats were on the brink of a filibuster-proof majority, just to make extra sure the GOP was powerless to stop his replacement. Whichever it is, needless to say, we’re at Obama’s mercy. The pick will almost certainly be a woman — at 48, Elena Kagan is young and the frontrunner as Solicitor General although Sonia Sotomayor’s name has been kicked around too — but beyond that, the sky’s the limit. The only “good” news is that Souter was one of the most reliably liberal votes on the Court. Barry O would have to appoint an out-and-out socialist, practically, to tilt it further left.

Update: As noted in the comments, Specter is on the Judiciary Committee that will quiz Souter’s replacement. He voted no on Bork in 1987. Think he’ll have the stones to oppose this one if he/she’s too “radical” given that his reelection prospects are squarely in Obama’s hands?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Bah

joe_doufu on April 30, 2009 at 10:27 PM

Arlen’s on the judiciary committee. This should be interesting.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:27 PM

Far-left Hispanic.

Bank on it.

artist on April 30, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Can we “Kelo” his home now?

coldwarrior on April 30, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Barry O would have to appoint an out-and-out socialist, practically, to tilt it further left.

eek

JeffreyLloyd on April 30, 2009 at 10:28 PM

well if Barry and the donks can’t resist the urge to put a raging commie up there it will be a net gain….

good club to hit them with for fundraising and it is not like Souter was a strict constructionist anyway….

not gonna let this get me down.

sven10077 on April 30, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Barry O would have to appoint an out-and-out socialist, practically, to tilt it further left.

…..

I expect nothing else.

Remember, he is “remaking America”.

That is a radical statement and hasn’t gotten any attention.

artist on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

No gain. Obie will replace him with someone just as liberal.

MaiDee on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Seriously, what is it with the law profession? Most (not all) lawyers are straight leftists.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

“Bah”???? He’s going to get THREE SCOTUS picks before his first term is out. This is very, very bad.

AYNBLAND on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Widely considered a political centrist by the American Bar Association Journal and others, Sotomayor was nominated on November 27, 1991, by President George H. W. Bush to a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated by John M. Walker, Jr.

Bush41. The gift that keeps on giving.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Barry O would have to appoint an out-and-out socialist, practically, to tilt it further left.

Always a possibility.

ddrintn on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Hey, isn’t Bill Clinton a lawyer?

Hmmmmm…

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Great, now we get another Ginsburg. Bah!

nazo311 on April 30, 2009 at 10:32 PM

AYNBLAND on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Since those who are likely to retire are all liberals, any replacements won’t change the overall makeup of the court.

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Souter waited until a Dem was in the White House.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Hey, isn’t Bill Clinton a lawyer?

Hmmmmm…

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

I don’t think Bill Clinton would want to be on the Supreme Court if he wasn’t going to be chief justice.

Mark1971 on April 30, 2009 at 10:32 PM

My prediction: Janet Reno

Ray Flicker on April 30, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Hey, isn’t Bill Clinton a lawyer?

Hmmmmm…

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

Game, set, match.

But what about Ginsberg (sp)?

Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Barry O would have to appoint an out-and-out socialist, practically, to tilt it further left.

Yeah, how much you want to bet on that? One hundred bucks that The One will appoint Secretary General of the National Lawyers Guild .

Lance Murdock on April 30, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Well at least it doesn’t change the make up of the court. It will be interesting to see who gets nominated.

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

But what about Ginsberg (sp)?
Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:33 PM

I don’t think Bubba would hit on her. She’s not really his type.

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

Also, what the hell was George H.W. Bush thinking when he nominated this guy? Yuck.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

The guy is a liberal. Who cares. At best for the Demos Souter is replaced by a liberal. At worse they get a moderate which will be great for us.

taney71 on April 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM

It’s kind of nice though to see somebody who isn’t so obsessed about power.

radiofreevillage on April 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM

Didn’t Bill lose his law license because he lied under oath? That would put him way further out of the running than I am sure he already is. Obama already gave the Clintons more than he thinks he owes them.

msmveritas on April 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM

Bill Clinton? White male? Not an ice cube’s chance in hell.

Marcus on April 30, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Hey maybe the wife? You know she’s really, really, really, really, smart. And she is sooooooooooooo fashionable too.

Lance Murdock on April 30, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Doug Kmiec, call your office?

cs89 on April 30, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Also, what the hell was George H.W. Bush thinking when he nominated this guy? Yuck.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

Blame John Sununu for this one.

Mark1971 on April 30, 2009 at 10:36 PM

msmveritas on April 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM

If I recall correctly, the end result was it was suspended for only a few years but even that was being deliberated.

sherry on April 30, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Daniel Ortega probably. There is no requirement that I am aware of that requires a Supreme Court justice to be a citizen.

crosspatch on April 30, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Doug Kmiec, call your office?

cs89 on April 30, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Dude that guy is weak, who would want him in the Supreme Court?

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Think he’ll have the stones to oppose this one if he/she’s too “radical” given that his reelection prospects are squarely in Obama’s hands?

Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised. He voted against Obama’s budget today and mortgage bailout amendment, IIRC.

It’s kind of nice though to see somebody who isn’t so obsessed about power.

radiofreevillage on April 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM

NPR says he’s wanted to leave for a while because he hates the city of Washington. He wants to go back home to NH.

amerpundit on April 30, 2009 at 10:37 PM

The guy is a liberal. Who cares. At best for the Demos Souter is replaced by a liberal. At worse they get a moderate which will be great for us.

Very true. For me, this is a non-story. Now if this was a conservative retiring, then we would be in big trouble.

tdavisjr on April 30, 2009 at 10:37 PM

But what about Ginsberg (sp)?
Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:33 PM
I don’t think Bubba would hit on her. She’s not really his type.

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

She has a pulse, therefore is Bubba’s type.

txag92 on April 30, 2009 at 10:38 PM

Silly goofball. Souter could simply have not shown up for work for a few years and nobody would have noticed.

Here comes Arlen Specter’s payoff.

viking01 on April 30, 2009 at 10:38 PM

It just gets f*cking worse and worse.

blatantblue on April 30, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Also, what the hell was George H.W. Bush thinking when he nominated this guy? Yuck.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

His chief of staff John Sununu, Sr. suggested Souter (NH Supreme Court). Souter was supposed to be somewhat conservative, but without any paper trail that would give the Dems ammo to use like they did with Bork’s writings.

There is no such thing as a stealth conservative judge. We found that out the hard way with O’Connor and Souter. And state court judges tend to drift left because they have no grounded federal jurisprudential philosophy.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:39 PM

This won’t end well.

WisCon on April 30, 2009 at 10:40 PM

I think this is a loss. Not only will the replacement be younger but Souter actually was not an enemy of free speech. If the Dem congress passes a Hate Speech law that would make it illegal to suggest that same sex marriage or anal sex is sinful, Souter would void it. You can bet that any nomination by Obama would uphold such a restriction.

KW64 on April 30, 2009 at 10:40 PM

Hey, isn’t Bill Clinton a lawyer?

Hmmmmm…

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

I never thought I’d say this but all things considered I miss Slick Willy right now. I’m pretty sure I’d prefer him in the Supreme Court over anyone the current POTUS is likely to nominate.

beancounter on April 30, 2009 at 10:40 PM

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:37 PM

I don’t expect him to be nominated, for the “diversity” and “ProLife” reasons. He did help Obama with Catholics, though, and a political payback would be in keeping with Obama’s appointments so far.

More likely, he’ll nominate a candidate or three who have to withdraw for “personal” reasons.

cs89 on April 30, 2009 at 10:40 PM

Think he’ll have the stones to oppose this one if he/she’s too “radical” given that his reelection prospects are squarely in Obama’s hands?

Uh, er, um NO!

Branch Rickey on April 30, 2009 at 10:40 PM

NPR says he’s wanted to leave for a while because he hates the city of Washington. He wants to go back home to NH.

I know. I think this is a sign of a mentally healthy individual. Shows he has some interests outside of law and politics. It’s kind of refreshing.

radiofreevillage on April 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM

There is no such thing as a stealth conservative judge. We found that out the hard way with O’Connor and Souter.

Yep. It’s like they teach liberalism 101 in law school.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM

Update: As noted in the comments, Specter is on the Judiciary Committee that will quiz Souter’s replacement. He voted no on Bork in 1987. Think he’ll have the stones to oppose this one if he/she’s too “radical” given that his reelection prospects are squarely in Obama’s hands?

Great, even if Obama appointed Marx himself to the bench Specter would have no choice but to approve of the appointment. We are so screwed…

Lance Murdock on April 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM

Another spike in gun sales over the next days/weeks/months. Wonder if they’ll be able to keep up with demand.

Marcus on April 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM

Didn’t Bill lose his law license because he lied under oath? That would put him way further out of the running than I am sure he already is. Obama already gave the Clintons more than he thinks he owes them.

msmveritas on April 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM

He got it back in 2006 according to story

And I’m still saying Bubba and wifey cut a deal with Obama, and this is part of it.

Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:42 PM

Oh well. Elections have consequences. Not like no one saw it coming. Obama will get 3-4 of them, so may as well vent now.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:42 PM

Thanks, Heather Mac Donald!

JohnJ on April 30, 2009 at 10:43 PM

let’s all hope that none of the good ones retire in the next 4 years.

homesickamerican on April 30, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Yep. It’s like they teach liberalism 101 in law school.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM

Why would a judge or lawyer support anything that guaranteed they’d get less work in the future? It’s not really about liberalism; it’s about job security. A simple world is anathema to a lawyer.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

How much did Obama offer to pay Souter to retire?

Will William Ayers or Bernadine Dohrn be Obama’s first replacement picks?

ToddonCapeCod on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Barryito Obamalini would have to appoint an out-and-out socialist anti-constitutionalist fascist, practically, to tilt it further left.

MB4 on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Thanks, Heather Mac Donald!

JohnJ on April 30, 2009 at 10:43 PM

What does Heather MacDonald have 2 do with this?

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

It will be interesting how Souter votes in some important cases from this term. Although, again Kennedy’s is the important vote.

One by the CT police officers who got the highest scores on an exam, but the exam was voided because no blacks scored high enough, the Voting Rights case that challenged the special restrictions on some southern states redistricting, and the McCain-Feingold law challenge on the Hillary documentary.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Hey, isn’t Bill Clinton a lawyer?

Hmmmmm…

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:30 PM

I was thinking the same thing………….

………. Great Caesar’s Ghost!!!

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2009 at 10:45 PM

He couldn’t resign 6 months ago?

Skywise on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Will there be a black backlash when Obama doesn’t appoint a black judge? Can’t wait to find out!

SouthernGent on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Oh well. Elections have consequences. Not like no one saw it coming. Obama will get 3-4 of them, so may as well vent now.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:42 PM

Too bad most people are too stupid to realize stuff like this. But if McCain was prez right now we would probably be in same boat right now anyway.

Lance Murdock on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Can you imaginge…………..

………….. Justice Jamie Gorelick???

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

How much did Obama offer to pay Souter to retire?

ToddonCapeCod on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Souter has become such a liberal that he probably just waited until a Dem could replace him.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Bombshell?

We could only hope Clinton gets nominated… He’d be too busy molesting MegMac to come to any of the “voty things.”

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Well here is an idea of the kind of person he’s looking for:

“TRAGEDY THAT ‘REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH’ NOT PURSUED BY SUPREME COURT”

Barack Obama in 2001.

nazo311 on April 30, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Souter has become such a liberal that he probably just waited until a Dem could replace him.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Kind of like Specter, except Specter had to take matters into his own hands…

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Lance Murdock on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

I go with someone’s estimation that things would only be 70% as bad.

I think if McCain were president, he wouldn’t be allowed to run up 2 trillion dollar deficits with impunity.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:47 PM

punk

Count to 10 on April 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM

The qualifications will come in this order:

Young
Solid Left
Female

After which Hispanic is a possibility.

P.S. Bill Clinton has less of a chance than I have.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM

While on the subject, can we have a coherent opposition raised to the most liberal nominees, which isn’t based on abortion or flag burning?

Free speech, eminent domain etc.

I like Scalia’s basic judicial philosophy but every time I heard him talk specifics, he’d always be like: “let’s take.. oh I don’t know… abortion”. If the biggest problem with a “living constitution” is that we may end up allowing abortion, boys kissing and inhaling the smoke of evil plants then I’ll still listen. But this issue will be assigned in my head the very 27th priority.

radiofreevillage on April 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM

“TRAGEDY THAT ‘REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH’ NOT PURSUED BY SUPREME COURT”

Barack Obama in 2001.

nazo311 on April 30, 2009 at 10:47 PM

And this is why “conservative ideological purity” isn’t such a bad thing. You know Specter the R would have voted in someone that believed the above crap if it gave him a 0.0001% higher chance of winning.

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:49 PM

………….. Justice Jamie Gorelick???

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Too much baggage from the 9/11 Commission (“Gorelick Wall”) and Freddie Mac/Fannie Maae.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:49 PM

I’m curious to see how Obama justifies whoever he tries to appoint. Will we hear the word “empathy,” and not the word “Constitution?”

kc8ukw on April 30, 2009 at 10:50 PM

The qualifications will come in this order:

Young
Solid Left
Female

After which Hispanic is a possibility.

P.S. Bill Clinton has less of a chance than I have.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM

I don’t see why Young is on top…

Further, I’d rather have a Young con versus an old shriveled Ginzburg.

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:50 PM

Think he’ll [Specter] have the stones to oppose this one if he/she’s too “radical” given that his reelection prospects are squarely in Obama’s hands?

Remember that pic of Dhimmi Barry O’Mussolini bowing so low to the Saudi Despot that his mouth was almost on his crotch?

Well, metaphorically speaking, that’s pretty much where Spectedict is now vis-a-vis Barackito.

MB4 on April 30, 2009 at 10:50 PM

The pick won’t be white, uptight and out of sight
More likely,if you see the light ,Rev. Jeremiah Wright

MaiDee on April 30, 2009 at 10:51 PM

The qualifications will come in this order:

Young
Solid Left
Female

After which Hispanic is a possibility.

P.S. Bill Clinton has less of a chance than I have.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Unless you meant that he wanted someone to leave a “legacy.”

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM

While on the subject, can we have a coherent opposition raised to the most liberal nominees, which isn’t based on abortion or flag burning?

radiofreevillage on April 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Beyond those issues, I don’t think people understand the supreme court’s power.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Well, this is a great time to resurrect the “moderate majority.” How many conservative Dems are reliably going to vote for a judicial crusader? Sounds to me like the GOP should start gathering allies NOW.

KingGold on April 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM

“Too much baggage from the 9/11 Commission (”Gorelick Wall”) and Freddie Mac/Fannie Maae.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:49 PM”

Which makes her perfect for NOTUS……..

…….. she is the insider’s “insider”.

And I was just saying in another post……….

………. “What is the next ‘crisis’ going to be?”

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:49 PM

She’s due for a promotion after all that! Peter principle and all that.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM

AP look at the bright side. You get a few extra thousand hits tonight. No TRAFFIC SEPPKU for you!

Lance Murdock on April 30, 2009 at 10:53 PM

I like Scalia’s basic judicial philosophy but every time I heard him talk specifics, he’d always be like: “let’s take.. oh I don’t know… abortion”. I

The media always portray Scalia as some extreme ideologue. The funny thing is when I hear him talk on C-SPAN he actually seems dispassionate and impartial. When I’ve heard him talk about Roe vs. Wade, it seems like he is doesn’t have strong opinions on abortion one way or another, like he doesn’t care. It is quite different from what it portrayed.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:53 PM

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:53 PM

That’s why they hate him.

lorien1973 on April 30, 2009 at 10:54 PM

I don’t see why Young is on top…

Further, I’d rather have a Young con versus an old shriveled Ginzburg.

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:50 PM

I didn’t mean ONLY young. I meant that relative youth was an absolute criterion, even before left wing. But left wing is also absolute.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 30, 2009 at 10:54 PM

Well, this is a great time to resurrect the “moderate majority.” How many conservative Dems are reliably going to vote for a judicial crusader? Sounds to me like the GOP should start gathering allies NOW.

KingGold on April 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Sure hope Steele is willing to spend money on negative ads.

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:54 PM

Far-left Hispanic.

Bank on it.

artist on April 30, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Negative. Axelrod’s whispering in his ears, and another Axelrod client needs to be rescued from the shitty job he’s doing in Massachusetts.

Besides, SCOTUS needs the “right” kind of black on the court.

My money is on Deval Patrick.

BuckeyeSam on April 30, 2009 at 10:54 PM

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Because Heather Mac Donald, Chris Buckley, Peggy Noonan all supported giving Obama the ability to pick Justices with a democrat-controlled Senate.

JohnJ on April 30, 2009 at 10:54 PM

Specter has problems, but so so the Dems, as the Dems in the senate with seniority don’t like that Harry promised to recognize Arlen’s 26 years in the senate and basically jump Arlen ahead in line for some plum committee assign,emts.

And in PA, there were two Dems (one being Rep. Joe Sestak), who had plans to run against Specter. Ed Rendell will have to talk them out of running in a primary.

So the Dems may have problems keeping promises to Arlen, too. Being the whore he is, he’ll do whatever advances his re-election chances.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Bambi will appoint himself.

The man can do it ALL!

PackerBronco on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

I didn’t mean ONLY young. I meant that relative youth was an absolute criterion, even before left wing. But left wing is also absolute.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 30, 2009 at 10:54 PM

No, I think I understand now. I thought you were implying that O liked “young hip” progs. But Biden would be the counterexample to that claim.

No, I think your point is that Obama wants to leave his mark on the SC

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Don’t forget about this one.
US supreme court hears case of teen strip searched at school

We’re screwed. Now how long before Ginsburg leaves? How sick is she?

Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

I honest to God hope that the GOP has the nuggets to grill whomever sits before them in the same manner as “Kill ‘Em” Kennedy did when now Chief Justice Roberts faced his questioning.

I honestly do.

madmonkphotog on April 30, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Don’t forget about this one.
US supreme court hears case of teen strip searched at school

We’re screwed. Now how long before Ginsburg leaves? How sick is she?

Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

What’s your point about the case?

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:57 PM

But what about Ginsberg (sp)?
Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:33 PM
I don’t think Bubba would hit on her. She’s not really his type.

Slublog on April 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM

She has a pulse, therefore is Bubba’s type.

txag92 on April 30, 2009 at 10:38 PM

Don’t forget gents, Slick Willy hit on an Egyptian mummy, so a pulse is optional.

Maquis on April 30, 2009 at 10:58 PM

We’re screwed. Now how long before Ginsburg leaves? How sick is she?

Knucklehead on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

She’s apparently recovering well from pancreatic cancer surgery, which is remarkable, as it usually is not treatable. She and Souter may have agreed to take turns retiring. That’s how Rehnquist got O’Connor to go first. He was planning to retire, and so was she, but he apparently convinced her not to do it the same year he did. Her husband became ill with Alzheimer’s so she went first.

Wethal on April 30, 2009 at 10:59 PM

The media always portray Scalia as some extreme ideologue. The funny thing is when I hear him talk on C-SPAN he actually seems dispassionate and impartial. When I’ve heard him talk about Roe vs. Wade, it seems like he is doesn’t have strong opinions on abortion one way or another, like he doesn’t care. It is quite different from what it portrayed.

terryannonline on April 30, 2009 at 10:53 PM

Yep. He’s very strict to the Constitution. He voted in favor of the right to flag burning, while he thinks it’s despicable personally, because he believes the 1st Amendment protects it. He talks about how the Constitution doesn’t mention marriage, etc. He’s actually pretty good.

amerpundit on April 30, 2009 at 10:59 PM

No, I think your point is that Obama wants to leave his mark on the SC

Upstater85 on April 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Yep.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on April 30, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4