Linda Chavez, writing for Human Events, provides a thoughtful commentary on the overarching importance of judicial selection.
She writes: Barack Obama set out his criteria for picking judges this way. “We need somebody who’s got the heart … the empathy to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old. And that’s going to be the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.
Hillary Clinton’s list was a little more substantive than Obama’s. She told attendees to a 2007 Planned Parenthood convention that she would pick judges who “understand the role of precedent,” by which she meant Roe v. Wade.
Read her entire column here.
The next President will likely have the ability to replace several new justices to the US Supreme Court.
Justice John Paul Stevens is nearly 90! Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 75, Justice Antonin Scalia is 72 and Stephen Breyer is 70, These are lifetime appointments, so they serve well past any reasonable term. No one should be making momentous policy decisions impacting the lives of all of the citizens of this county when hey are pushing 90!!!