- Concurring Opinions - http://www.concurringopinions.com -

Clinton or Gillibrand for SCOTUS

Posted By Lawrence Cunningham On November 15, 2012 @ 2:18 pm In Current Events,Jurisprudence | 2 Comments

Professor Bainbridge picked up [1]on my post [2]about the importance to New York of Gov. Cuomo choosing for top court appointments jurists who are pro-business, as well as agreeing with the Governor’s liberal views.  The Professor notes that this is equally important for President Obama, including for the Supreme Court. 

 Two examples of such liberal pro-business people who would be wonderful spring to mind: Bill Clinton, though he has already said [3]he’s too old for the job, and his wife’s successor, Senator Kristin Gillibrand (whom I would suggest for the New York Court of Appeals, though such a job doesn’t seem likely to appeal to freshly-elected U.S. Senator).

2 Comments (Open | Close)

2 Comments To "Clinton or Gillibrand for SCOTUS"

#1 Comment By Brett Bellmore On November 15, 2012 @ 6:21 pm

While I suppose it’s not technically a legal obstacle, Supreme Court justices don’t have to be lawyers, but you really think the President should spend political capital nominating a disbarred lawyer?

#2 Comment By Joe On November 15, 2012 @ 8:26 pm

Gillibrand has turned out to be a fine choice for senator but especially after just winning her first full term, I see little reason she would be a logical choice for court of appeals.

Article printed from Concurring Opinions: http://www.concurringopinions.com

URL to article: http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2012/11/clinton-or-gillibrand-for-scotus.html

URLs in this post:

[1] picked up : http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2012/11/looking-for-liberal-judges-who-are-pro-business.html

[2] my post : http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2012/11/calling-liberal-pro-business-judges.html

[3] already said : http://www.concurringopinions.com http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/18/bill-clinton-on-supreme-c_n_541970.html

Copyright © 2010 Concurring Opinions. All rights reserved.