Deval Patrick, Elizabeth Warren floated as possible Supreme Court picks

[6chars]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Goblinmonger (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Boston Globe

Former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick and U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren have been mentioned as potential picks for the Supreme Court in light of justice Antonin Scalia’s death over the weekend.

Patrick, for one, is friends with President Barack Obama and shares backgrounds at Harvard Law School and in civil rights law.



Warren, too, has her promoters. Rep. Alan Grayson, a Democratic congressman from Florida, pushed for a new Justice Warren in a Huffington Post article on Monday:

She has been an indefatigable watchdog over the capital markets for almost a decade, going back to her extraordinarily valuable work on the Congressional Oversight Panel for the federal bailout program. She created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, even though the Senate Republicans wouldn’t let her run it. She electrified the nation with her “you didn’t build that” speech. And she has been a tireless and effective U.S. Senator. ...



Read more: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2016/02/16/deval-patrick-elizabeth-warren-floated-possible-supreme-court-picks/Js50Kwk896Xj2b0MJChzYI/story.html

[treestar]

1. What is the obsession with Elizabeth Warren?

Anything comes up and it's supposed to be hers. What qualifies her for this one now?

[6chars]

2. Harvard Law professor

[leftofcool]

8. Lots of those in this country!

[Fearless]

25. Harvard law professor

Who is in the Senate, set up the consumer protection bureau, is vocally progressive, who is a pro-choice feminist, that supports the reversal of Citizen's United...

What exactly is your problem with Elizabeth Warren?

[A Simple Game]

4. Looking for Hillary's consolation prize already? n/t

[FailureToCommunicate]

6. Agreed. AND we'd lose a good Senator. Sorry Grayson, she's a non starter for that

position. She is needed right where we elected to be.

[Fearless]

26. 1 of 100 votes or one of 7?

Which one is more important?

[sketchy]

31. I think we can't afford to lose her as a senator

She's great behind a podium explaining things so EVERYONE can understand them. She's a master explainer, in my opinion. I think on the Supreme Court her much needed voice would be muted.

[malthaussen]

10. Antonin Scalia was abundantly qualifed.

I think asking about the "qualifications" for high office is somewhat disingenuous, especially as it presumes the one asking the question is competent to determine qualification.

-- Mal

[Lancero]

14. What disqualifies her?

[Helen Borg]

24. She is the anti-Hillary!

I wish Sanders picked her for VP.

[A Simple Game]

3. I think Warren would be a great Supreme Justice if she were 20 years younger. n/t

[Blue_Adept]

5. Boston Paper Picks Boston Candidates

No surprises here.

Neither would be put up. Warren is sticking where she is and Patrick is too close to Obama and that will make him even more unpalatable to Republicans.

[malthaussen]

7. I'd be astonished if Mrs Warren wants the job.

I think our country would be best-served with her continuing in the Senate until she can succeed Mr Sanders as President. If we could have 16 years of Sanders and Warren, it might go a long way to easing some of the damage done since Reagan (to say nothing of Nixon). Of course, Mr Sanders needs to win this one first for that to happen, and then last for both terms, neither of which is guaranteed.

-- Mal

[Lorien]

9. Agreed. nt

[maxsolomon]

17. Can no one at DU count?

Sanders is 74 now, he'll be 75 on 1/20/17. 83 years old when you want Elizabeth Warren to take over.

Warren is 66 now, she'll be 74 on 1/20/25. 82 when she'd leave office in 2033.

By contrast, Obama is going to be 55 when he leaves office. Just because our 2 candidates are among the oldest people ever to run for the President (Reagan was HRC's age, 69, Bernie is the oldest ever) doesn't mean that 2 septuagenarians in a row holding the most taxing job on the planet is a viable plan.

Now, commence calling me an Ageist, everyone.

[malthaussen]

21. No need to be uncivil.

And I mention that the longevity of Mr Sanders is a factor to consider. If someone from a younger cohort comes up who looks to have the same capacity as Sanders and Warren, then he would be a good choice. Did you have someone in mind? Joaquin or Julien Castro, perhaps?

-- Mal

[Fearless]

27. Best suited in the Senate is code

Code for out of the way and won't make an impact. Just FYI.

[malthaussen]

30. Perhaps for some it is.

It is not for me, and I stand by my assertion. Mrs Warren is invaluable as a Senator, and would make a fine President.

-- Mal

[Fearless]

32. But an educated, experienced, anti-corporate, pro-choice feminist on the court... she wouldn't be??

[malthaussen]

34. Certainly.

Where will she best serve the country? Mr Sanders can't be cloned, it is against his ethics. I don't know where Mrs Warren stands on the subject.

-- Mal

[vdogg]

11. Warren is better as a Senator

Losing her in the Senate would be a stupid thing to do.

[Fearless]

33. Why is that exactly?

She is 1 of 100 votes. MA can easily find another liberal to run. We do have a history of that after all... We've elected exactly one republican Senator since... 1972.

[Myrina]

12. I love Liz Warren but she is needed in the Senate ...

... at least until some common sense legislation that doesn't fuck the hell out of average folks is set into law.

Then once it is, several years down the road, she can get onto the SCOTUS and uphold those laws.

[frazzled]

13. Not floated by the White House

This is as silly as the Nobel Peace Prize nominations, where anybody who is a member of a government anywhere, or anyone who is a professor anywhere across a number of fields may submit a name.

This is typical home-town Boston "hub of the universe" wishful thinking.

[thesquanderer]

15. Repubs in Congress wouldn't even approve Warren as director of the CFPB

so how would anyone think they would approve her for SC? Unless maybe they want to keep her off Sanders' ticket as VP.

[still_one]

16. She is more than qualified, but it would be a mistake to nominate her. For one thing, she is a very

important Senator, and whether any SC nominee could get through this Senate is questionable at the very least, and why take her energies away from legislative issues, for a nomination which would very likely be voted down?

[Fearless]

29. Yes a pro-choice, feminist, anti-corporate supreme court judge... now that's just silly talk

[Calista241]

18. I don't think her nomination would survive

Her record is loud, proudly stated, and documented. That fact is different from every other recent appointment, and like it or not, the Repubs control the Senate and the process involved in moving an appointment forward.

[Sunlei]

19. probably one of the Judges Obama nominated in 2010/11 & were voted in with full R support.

We love Mrs. Warren but lets enjoy her as Senator for the next decade first please

[djean111]

20. Deval Patrick? The guy who joined Bain Capital?

Oh. Come to think of it, a corporatist would not be that much of a surprise.

[CentralMass]

28. He's a good man. He would be an excellent choice.

[Plucketeer]

22. Wow!

Replies #1 & #8 - WTF??? I think Warren is a REAL asset right where she is. Perfectly positioned to take the baton from a second term President Sanders.

Really, Obama needs to comb the field to find a qualified black woman to nominate.

[Helen Borg]

23. I hope it's Lessig!

[Goblinmonger]

35. I'm locking as not LBN

Please feel free to repost this in GD.

Thanks.