Over yonder at Southern Appeal, Steve Dillard has a post on an NPR interview he heard with new Senate minority leader Harry Reid of Nevada in which the latter expressed more openness to having Antonin Scalia as chief justice rather than Clarence Thomas. He said:
"If they [Republicans], for example, gave us Clarence Thomas as chief
justice, I personally feel that would be wrong. If they give us Antonin
Scalia, that’s a little different question. I may not agree with some
of his opinions, but I agree with the brilliance of his mind."
Setting aside the obvious, if implicit, insult that Thomas is a dumb-dumb, I think Reid is being disingenuous. It isn’t the brilliance of Scalia’s mind that he admires (Thomas is brilliant, too). It isn’t that he thinks Scalia would be a lot more palatable to a Dem point of view, for the two share the same general judicial philosophy and usually vote the same way. The reason is this:
Scalia is older.
A while back I did some calculations on the future of the Supreme Court based on when justices are likely to retire. While there is no guarantee that particular justices will retire in particular years, based on recent trends, Scalia would most likely retire about 2014, while Thomas isn’t expected to retire until about 2026.
(Here’s the math: Of late the average justice has retired at age 78, Scalia was born in 1936, Thomas in 1948. Would need more medical/family data to provide a more refined estimate of retirement.)
Reid is trying to keep an originalist from occupying the chief justice’s seat for longer than he has to.
The hypocrite.
I hope Bush nominates Thomas–one among several reasons being precisely the one Reid is afraid of.