Who's up for replacement? John Paul Stevens at 88 is
at the top of my list, he's been on the court for 33 years! Ruth Bader
Ginsburg at 75, the next oldest, and having (only) 15 years on the
court, has looked old as long as I can remember, would have been my
second pick.
I could only hope and (mock pray) that Antonin Scalia at 72 and second
most experienced at a mere 22 years experience, and/or Clarence "Gabby"
Thomas, at a relatively young 60, but with 17 years of bench time, would
somehow need to be replaced.

Two more possibilities are Kennedy at 72 and Breyer at 70 with 20 and 16
years experience, respectively, don't seem quite ready to go. However,
if Obama does not make re-election in '12, or the Repugs win in '16, it
would be great if they both stepped down so younger (early '50's)
progressive/liberal justices could be put in place. Souter at 69 and 18
year experience might also squeeze into the last category.

So, where do we stand? Two probable replacements, and a possibility of
up to three more and still little change in the court completion?!!
Well, if Kennedy goes, then we could capture that swing spot. Well it
could at least re-load 4 liberal votes another 20+ years and possible
give a solid 5. If we get lucky on Scalia or Thomas, that is a big
bonus. Ginsburgs recent health problems suddenly may move her to the top
of the list, and may put Obama in the hot seat sooner than expected.

Now for some fun postulating, and lighting of fireworks displays or
brushfires.

While discussing this with a friend, I had the random thought of "maybe
this is why Obama is spurning the idea of Howard Dean for a cabinet
post? He's keeping him in his pocket for a court appointment!" Ok, ok,
fun idea but Dean's a doctor, not a lawyer, and probably not
educationally prepared for this kind of spot. He still should be
seriously considered for the HHS cabinet post, Rham just needs to get
over whatever problem he may have with Dean. Then we started seriously
trying to think of good options for Supreme Court appointments.

We don't know squat about current appeals or circuit court judges to
speculate there, but the political arena is more fertile ground,
particularly for lawyers. Hey, even Hillary Clinton was tossed around as
a court possibility, a nice reward for a race hard fought. (but
definitely would not be my choice)

Then a fun thought hit me - maybe ludicrous, maybe brilliant, you tell
me, but the fireworks show itself could be worth it.

Someone many of us at least know of, described on Wikipedia as someone
who "has served as a state senator, lobbyist, lawyer, educator, and
social worker supporter. Additionally, the political views have been
secularist and civil libertarian and is a self described atheist
humanist Jew". Also, a former teacher of United States constitutional
law, education law, and American history at the University of Phoenix.

Have you guessed it yet?
Ok, one last clue, she would be keeping at least one female on the court
----------------- SCROLL DOWN
|
|
|
|
V
|
|
|
V
|
|
|
V
|
|
|
V
|
|
|
V
|
|
|
V


Lori Lipman Brown, former director of the Secular Coalition for America.

Although she has never served on the bench (she did run for the Nevada
Supreme Court in 2004),  she has valuable experience and a philosophy
that secularists would particularly appreciate. Even if there were no
chance in, well, not hell but some other really hot desert region, of
her getting the appointment, the nomination, or even the serious
floating of her name as a possibility, might cause the likes of
Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity etc. to blow such streams of smoke out their
ears as to make the whole effort worth it. Just think of the apoplexy by
Rick Warren, Pat Robertson and the entire right wing fruit basket of
characters. It brings a warm smile to my face.

Seriously though, she is way more qualified than a couple of
Bush floated options, Harriet Myers and Alberto Gonzales. Maybe not so
crazy after all. She would definitely shake things up. I hear that Lori
and the Secular Coalition were also able to participate in many of the
Obama transition team meetings and put their two cents in, so her name
may already be well known by Obama and his team. I'm not sure of her
age, but guessing around 50 due to her 1981 graduation from UNLV. That
would give a good 20+ years on the bench in defense of secularism.

Still, her lack of judicial experience would be a huge impediment to
getting a nomination. However there may be a way around it.

Every one of the current justices served on a Court of Appeals
immediately before the Supreme Court. However, Roberts only served two
years on the bench coming from private practice, and Thomas only spent
one year there after having been the chairman of the EEOC. Both looked
like grooming appointments. I'm not sure what Lori is doing right now
since stepping down from the Secular Coalition position, but if a Court
of Appeals spot were open, she could be put there as preparation for
Supreme Court, and there is plenty of precedent for non-judges filling
those slots. Also,  the Supreme Court is somewhat different than other
courts and the type of experience needed is different, with more
constitutional law and equal rights exposure (Thomas - EEOC, Ginsburg -
ACLU) being important. Secular Coalition followed by Court of Appeals
would be a good combination.

If deemed qualified for a spot on the bench, the Democrats could
certainly make it happen. Although they don't have a filibuster proof 60
votes, they really should not need that. Since the Republicans raised
the specter of the nuclear option in 2005, it's only fair to raise
it this year as we approach judicial nominations from Obama. In light of
the Republicans great exhibition of bi-partisanship - NOT! - the
Democrats in control (especially Pelosi, Reid and Obama) need to grow
some big stones and do the job they were elected to do!

Lori's secular stance is a definite plus in progressive circles, it
could be a hinderence for Court of Appeals or Supreme Court appointment.
But that is no excuse to be defeatist and not try our best to overcome
that. And, yes, it would be fun to watch the effort.

All that said, It is not specifically Lori that I'm really pushing for,
it is all that she represents that fits what I would like to see added
the court. If there are any other qualified people out there that also
fit the bill, we should be trying to build that list. After all, there
will probable be at least 2, and up to 5 (if we are lucky) spots for
Obama to fill during his administration. For example, Federal Judge John
E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller V. Dover trial in 2005, has
been mentioned. He has become a secular hero to many since he handed
down his remarkable decision in the controversial trial about
Intelligent Design. He is so revered that in June, 2008, Judge Jones was
awarded the American Humanist Association’s Humanist Religious Liberty
Award at the World Humanist Congress in Washington, DC

We want to start pushing our secular agenda early, and often. Seriously,
give this some thought and let me know what you think.