"Posner has written several opinions sympathetic to abortion rights, including a decision that held that "partial-birth abortion" was constitutionally protected in some circumstances."
Never gonna happen.
(not trying to turn this into an abortion conversation, just saying that once that becomes well-known, no way he gets past the senate)
Isn't that why the constitution provides for <Nine> justices, though? ;) Is it not odd(?) that USA appoints people with no ideas ever expressed,[1] over peoplel like Posner who actually have something important to say? The purpose of having Nine is to allow for differences of opinion on minor things (in the scheme of Statesmanship), while having the best and the brightest contibute unique expertise.
Ms. Kagan’s responses, during a long and sometimes tense day of parrying with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, were similar to those of Supreme Court nominees past. But unlike her predecessors, Ms. Kagan wrote a 1995 article calling for judicial nominees to be more forthcoming. On Tuesday, minutes into her testimony, she backpedaled, saying she now believed it would be inappropriate even to answer questions that might “provide some kind of hints” about her views on matters of legal controversy.
Isn't that why the constitution provides for <Nine> justices, though?
The number of justices on SCOTUS isn't set by the Constitution, it's set by Congress. Throughout history there have been as many as 10 and as few as 5 justices.
Is it not odd(?) that USA appoints people with no ideas ever expressed, over peoplel like Posner who actually have something important to say?
He'd be a great, inspired pick for anyone but the real reason he won't be appointed is his age. Politically the dominant strategy is to appoint justices that can be expected to hold the seat for at least two decades.
Yes, I think he's got a problem there, because his best chance is the Democrats picking him, but his best fit is with the Republicans, for whom he isn't orthodox enough. If a Democratic president picked him, he'd probably be confirmed: he has enough "non-left" background for bipartisan credibility (a Chicago-school law-and-economics background), but has enough left-leaning positions that at least some Dems shouldn't find him impossible to support. But, he's 72, which limits his appeal as a bipartisan choice. And as a straight Republican nominee has has problems on things like abortion. So I would guess he's not destined for the Supreme Court.
"Posner has written several opinions sympathetic to abortion rights, including a decision that held that "partial-birth abortion" was constitutionally protected in some circumstances."
Never gonna happen.
(not trying to turn this into an abortion conversation, just saying that once that becomes well-known, no way he gets past the senate)