1. Is the lack of pay among Congolese soldiers weakening its offensive
against the FDLR?
2. Are Maoist hardliners jeopardizing the Nepalese peace process?
3. How can the international community tackle Iraq’s problem of unemployment?
4. What should the U.S. do with the Uighurs at Gitmo?
5. Are life sentences for juveniles convicted of nonlethal crimes a violation of the Eighth Amendment?
6. How can the Boston Globe survive?
7. Should the U.S. stop drone attacks in Pakistan?
8. Can structural reforms cure Spain’s economic woes?
9. Should Obama appoint a strong liberal to replace Souter?
10. Will Arlen Specter’s switch of parties cause him to alter his position on the Employee Free Choice Act?
Month: May 2009
Last Friday, Supreme Court justice David Souter announced his retirement, pending the confirmation of a successor. Souter has been a liberal vote on the court, progressively moving in that direction since arriving to the Court in 1990. He was a former New Hampshire Attorney General, New Hampshire Supreme Court justice, and First Circuit Court of Appeals justice before serving on the highest court in the United States.
As most extempers are aware, mostly from their U.S. history classes in high school, the Supreme Court is one of the more powerful branches of government. It derives its power from judicial review, the power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional. This was a power that was not expressly given to the Court in the Constitution, but was created in the 1803 Supreme Court decision of Marbury v. Madison.
With Souter’s retirement, President Barack Obama will have his first opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice, enjoying this power earlier in his presidency than his predecessor George W. Bush, who had to wait until his second term to receive his first Supreme Court appointment (and he selected John Roberts).
This brief will explain Souter’s arrival to the Court and his legacy, discuss possible successor options, and the political minefield that this decision creates for President Obama.