That was pretty funny! Bush trying to do something good! Ok, let's be serious now.

Roe v Wade is broadly popular.

The Republican coalition does not want to re-open Roe v Wade, no matter what the wingnuts want.

Seems pretty simple to me.

The logic is not that different from when Souter was selected.  On Roe v Wade at least, Souter was not accidental.

-----

Add to that the fact that the WH is under a pretty serious siege due to Plamegate, and for whatever bizarre strategic reason, they've decided to try going to the center to bail them out instead of resorting to the normal polarization strategy.

There's a first time for everything.

(Rumor) It's the other 5th Circuit Edith.

I have slightly more faith in the bottom-line Machiavellians in this WH than to think that they would sacrafice a killer SCOTUS nominee, who would affect the legal future of this country for YEARS, so as not to rock the boat in the very-slightly-stormy waters of "Plamegate."

-sam 

"I agree, Petey ... but, the rumors coming out now seem to be drifting us back away from Clement. If they've been floating a trial balloon all day to see how it played, they sure suckered people."

They're just dominating the news cycle to make sure the Rovian Interruptus takes two days instead of one.

Something doesn't fit, for sure. Which tells me it ain't going to be Clement.  More likely it will be the other Edith (Jones) who is more of a hard-line conservative who is anti-Roe.

It won't be Clement. This was the White House giving the wingnuts a loyalty test. Also, no doubt the hope is they'll feel grateful and relieved at the actual nominee even if s/he is not as far right as they might like.

Predicition: It will be Edith Jones.

Go read the concurring opinion she wrote in McCorvey's recent attempt to overthrow Roe...

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/03/03-10711-CV0.wpd.pdf

Might be the opposite tact they used to use at the beginning of the term when he asked for something so right-wing looney that Dems would dance for joy when they got an only slightly right-wing looney outcome.

So, maybe Bush scares the crap out of the evangelists with an only slightly right-wing looney choice to get them to jump for joy over his really right-wing looney choice, despite him being only mostly insane.

She said it was settled law -- for her non-Supreme Court confirmation hearing.  In other words, appeals court judges have to treat Roe as a precedent.

But for Supreme Court justices?  Well, it's up to them to decide if precedents should be overturned, "settled law" or not.  

Question:  Do you believe the constitutional right to privacy encompasses a woman's right to have an abortion? Answer: The Supreme Court has clearly held that the right to privacy guaranteed by the Constitution includes the right to have an abortion. The cases handed down by the Supreme Court on the right to abortion have reaffirmed and redefined this right, and the law is settled in that regard. If confirmed, I will faithfully apply Supreme Court precedent.

I haven't looked very closely at Clement's opinions (who outside the 5th circuit had before today?), but I've gone through a random sample of her appellate work, and it's all pretty straightforward stuff. She seems to delight in very close readings, so her work is both relentlessly logical and very precise. As for "the other Edith," well, her opinions are well-known....

I agree that it is not Clements the quasi moderate (as opposed to the other).  This group would never play to the middle.  They only play to their base.  It will most certainly be a right wing nut and totally test the nuclear compromise (which was not a comprmise but a delay of the show down).

All of that is well and good and also true but its hard to deny that a candidate's opinion on Roe is a decent indicator of their judicial philosophy.  In other words, Roe itself is bigger than  simply the abortion issue.

Updates here, but current betting on Tradesports suggests Luttig may get the nod.

I say that unless the nominee comes out and says that she feels Jesus wants her to end abortion and convert everyone to Christianity, then the Democrats should deny Bush the fight...

They should come back from recess and confirm almost immediately, and turn the focus back on Rove. Even better, the Democratic Leadership should trade a smooth confirmation for public hearings on the Plame/Leak. It's an offer of bi-partisan cooperation that is for the good of the country, and by refusing it, the White House is right back in the middle of their stonewalling act. 

Can't you just see Sen. Reid coming out of the White House and addressing the press?

"We tried to end the rancor and partisanship by agreeing to a quick confirmation, while at the same time offering to assist the President with his pledge to return honor and dignity to the White House by suggesting a bi-partisan congressional investigation that would bring transparency to the process to show the nation that they can trust their government to do what's right for the American People.

"We are saddened that the President refused this offer of cooperation, and disturbed by the lack of interest he showed in wanting to find the truth behind the breach of National Security centered around the leak of Valerie Plame's identity to the press.

"Ultimately, the American People need to ask themselves whose interests the President is really serving..."

I agree with the consensus that it probably isn't Clement, and would only add that, if the object is to create a diversion from the Rove scandal, a polarizing nominee fills the bill better than an easily confirmed one.

I saw that post. I agree, losing loved ones for a war that inspires more terrorists is indeed a bad lie. As is lying to out someone who could prevent a nuclear bomb from coming to our country, which could kill millions. Or outing a Pakistani double agent who could have led to dozens of arrests that prevented many others from being killed. Or lying about stem cell research that could save thousands. Or the billions who will be effected if we bring the world economy into a Great Depression, or those millions who lose their homes due to rising sea levels.

When we're talking about the costs of this Presidency in purely human terms, it's impossible to measure. Isn't it better to just all agree the man is hideously evil rather than wasting time debating the finer points of what evil the man has committed that hits the number one spot? Many, many more will die as a direct result of the Bush Presidency, and all will feel their loss is the most tragic. But the loss of human lives from Bush policy won't be limited to Iraq, I'm afraid, and each and every one of them deserves our unequivocal condemnation.

While I agree with your lament that the abortion issue -- important as it is -- unduly swamps other critical issues, I do have to take issue with your rosy assessment of the potential post-Roe terrain.  Should Roe go down with the Congress in its current configuration, it is virtually certain that federal legislation outlawing abortion will be passed.  In that event, we may well see the on-again off-again states' rights bloc flip-flop once more -- as they did in the medical marijuana case, in which the sanctity of the (really rather silly) Wickard v. Filburn reasoning was upheld. 

Since it is not Clements, my guess is, Bush will swing for the fences and appeal to his base. 

ABC did say he had told Clement that he had decided to go in "another direction."  And that, of course, almost certainly means the wrong direction.  :-|

Also, that Luttig was in DC, with wife, who was dressed up.

Luttig was part of a 3-judge panel for the Fourth Circuit hearing the Padilla case today in Alexandria.  (And from the reports I heard, he was on the side of the government, encouraging them to argue that Padilla had indeed been seized on the battlefield--the battlefield being the U.S.  Good-bye habeas corpus.)

I just heard Nina Totenberg on NPR's All Things Considered say that she had spoken with an attorney in Louisiana who had a meeting with Clement this morning in Clement's office. Totenberg stressed that Clement would have had time to get on a plane after the meeting and get to D.C., but Totenberg seemed to doubt that Clement is the one.

I have two reliable sources who say that it's going to be Luttig.

So it's gonna be Roberts? How bad is this?