A NEW JUSTICE

Debate has begun in earnest about who will replace the woman who was arguably the most powerful person in the world. Think that's exaggerating? Think about it -she was the "swing-vote" on the highest court of the most powerful nation in the world. Her one vote could decide whether a case was won or lost or whether a piece of legislation or a lower court holding would stand as constitutional or fail as not. Scared yet?

Personally, I have two requirements for a Supreme Court Justice:

1. That they rule in accordance with stare decisis (settled law)
2. Unless they are breaking from precedent to protect the individual rights granted in the Bill of Rights, or to overturn existing law in order to grant greater individual rights under the Bill of Rights.

Pretty simple, eh?

Using that test none of the ten controversial judges who were catalysts for talk about the "Nuclear Option" would stand a chance as they all had records of ruling contrary to binding precedent and not to prop-up or expand individual rights, but to favor corporate or governmental rights. See my post "THE FILIBUSTERED TEN" for details.

Does Alberto Gonzalez withstand the test? Honestly, I'm not familiar enough with his record as a Texas Judge to know. I am however predictably suspicious that he fails, because his recent exploits as a Bush toadie, weaseling past and disparaging the Geneva Convention rules, do not give one reason for optimism. I'm sure that we'll find out in the days ahead.

Start the pop-corn popping -this should be fun.