Crawford: Obama Wants No Fight Over SCOTUS

The White House will try to paint the Supreme Court as being "out of touch" with everyday Americans, as President Obama considers nominees to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, but it doesn't want a fight over its nomination, CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford said Sunday on "Face the Nation."

The president will especially consider how potential nominees view the Supreme Court's recent, controversial decision in the "Citizens United" campaign finance reform case, Crawford told host Bob Schieffer.

Mr. Obama himself took an unprecedented swipe at the decision during his State of the Union address, saying the ruling would "open the floodgates" to special interest money in political campaigns.

On Friday, the president again referenced the case when addressing Stevens' retirement, saying that he will choose a nominee "who, like Justice Stevens, knows that in a democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens."

"That statement was calculated and deliberate," Crawford said. "They're going to have a nominee that they think can prove Democrats, not Republicans, understand everyday Americans."

Nevertheless, Crawford said, Mr. Obama is likely to avoid nominating anyone Republicans could potentially filibuster.

"They don't want that kind of fight," she said.

The president will have to balance his interest in nominating a progressive candidate with consideration for whom he could get confirmed.

The current top contenders, Crawford said, are believed to be Federal Appellate Judge Diane Wood, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, and Federal Judge Merrick Garland.


More Coverage of John Paul Stevens' Retirement:

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens Retiring
Read Justice Stevens' letter to President Obama
Obama Praises John Paul Stevens, Seeks Nominee With Similar Qualities
Obama on Justice Stevens' Retirement
Kagan, Wood, Head List of Likely Court Nominees
Replacing John Paul Stevens: A Strategic, Not Political Pick
John Paul Stevens' Retirement: Republicans Prepare for Supreme Court Battle
Jan Crawford: Does Obama Want a Supreme Court Fight?
Obama's Second Supreme Court Pick Likely Will Be Easier Than His First

[OrangeCountyAndrew]

I am commenting here only because the article I wanted to comment on originally was deleted after a storm of protests from the White House.

It was irresponsible of CBS News to allow a partisan conservative who has a history of committing plagiarism to publish a blog that spread malicious false rumors of one of the potential Supreme Court picks. Even if what he said about one of the potential nominees was true, it was besides the point and irrelevant to President Obama's criteria as to what he looks in a Supreme Court nominee.

To the fascist idiots at CBS News, I hope the person the irresponsible blogger was gossiping about sues your organization for libel and defamation.

[stn_sage]

The ONLY way Obama and the Democrats in Congress can avoid a fight with the Republicans, who have essentially promised to try to block the nominee before he/she is even named!...is to allow THEM to make the choice!

Now, are they so gutless, that they are prepared to give up their right to make the selection, just to avoid the typically nasty verbal 'food fight', public relations attacks, that the Republicans will wage?

If so, then they shouldn't be the majority party!

Name your nominee, then fight for him/her, but sprout a backbone!

The Republicans are building an impressive record of OBSTRUCTION
and NON-COOPERATION, which they will have to run upon at election time!
If, the Democrats are smart enough to remind the public!

Frankly, the GOP shouldn't / can't afford to act as obstructionists
much more, they do so, at their own peril!

[ConstitutionGal912]

NO is a good thing being that we're headed towards a Marxist/Socialist Rule. The Supreme Court is supposed to use the US Constitution to rule on cases, not prior "case law suits", not international law and definitely not how one "feels".

[tsigili]

The ObamaAdmin, has no concept of what is "in tune with everyday Americans"!

How can people who are among the wealthiest and influential, in the entire country, have any concept of what an ordinary American wants? They can't. It's a stupid statement.

[chitown639]

President Obama should give up on offering the "Olive Branch" to the right. Those on the right are dedicated solely to destroying him and his presidency at all cost. Obama should have realized by now that there is absolutely nothing that he could say or do that will compel the Republicans to put aside their partisan differences and actually participate in governing rather than impulsively obstructing every function of our government simply for political gamesmanship. You can't play nicey nicey with folks who would easily choose the destruction of our country over contributing to the success of the president...and our country. Why can't Obama see that the Republicans aren't interested and will never be interested in helping him govern, because as long as he is our president the Right-Wingers will eagerly consider themselves "Enemies Within" our borders. Hasn't Obama seen the rise in hate groups and domestic terrorists attacks coming from the right during his presidency?

President Obama, it's time to stop attempting to meet the right half way on anything and work on making your liberal base happy. Appoint the most liberal Supreme Court Justice you can find......

[ConstitutionGal912]

Right-Wing Hate Groups & Domestic Terrorists. Hmmm, as usual, the left-wingers don't have any specifics. I do! ELF, a domestic left-wing extremist terrorist group. SEIU Thugs who beat up a black man for selling American Flags, telling him he was on the wrong side. A radical left-winger in CA who bit off the finger of a Tea Party protester. La Raza, who in their protest damaged business's to the tune of millions. Left-wingers protesting the G20 in Philly, again damaging properties to the tune of millions. I sure Obama is a very nice guy. However, his political viewpoints of Marxism & Socialism are unconstitutional. Congress, Left & Right, are a corrupt, greedy progressives, too.

[RobAla]

His last appointment,Justice Sotomayer, should have never been nominated or confirmed. She was so out step with the Court that several of her decisions that went before the Supreme Court were overturned. A Justice must base decisions strictly on the US Constitution, rather than personal feelings or an agenda.

CBS News: 04/09/10: Senator Sessions from Alabama was correct in his statements below:
Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, voted against Sotomayor. In a statement today, he warned the president of the lessons learned from Sotomayor's confirmation.
"The product of her confirmation hearing was a near-universal rejection of President Obama's empathy standard, the flawed notion that judges should allow personal feelings, political opinions, and social views to guide judicial decision-making," Sessions said. "The public is deeply concerned about the future of our country, and I expect that the American people will watch these proceedings more closely than ever before. There is much at stake, as the court's interpretation of the Constitution in the coming years could significantly affect the implementation of domestic polices approved by the president and Congress over the past year.""
Sessions said he hopes he can support the president's nomination but that he will not vote for a nominee who does not "demonstrate a commitment to the Constitution, the rule of law, and the oath of a judge."

[tmittelstaed]

I for one hope that Obama picks someone YOUNG I am sick and tired of these 80-year-old granpawz making decisions. Bush had it right when he selected a 45 year old Chief Justice. I'd like to see Obama pick someone in their 30's.

An old Supreme Court justice doesen't have to live with the consequences of his or her decisions because they don't have much more time to live. So they can do what they want with impunity and usually do.

[lakota2012]

I'd like to see President Obama choose Elizabeth Warren, chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP, and someone that has devoted much of the past 3 decades to studying the economics of middle class families, and teaches contract law, bankruptcy and commercial law at Harvard Law School.

[lakota2012]

While jan crawford might think that the White House doesn't want a partisan battle over the next SCOTUS appointment, the republiCONS are already preparing for a major fight, so President Obama might as well just pick a liberal justice to stand up for the "little guy" just like Justice Stevens has been doing for years.

[retm-w]

Well as long as he doesn't pick another tax cheat.

[propitiation]

Suezee, the Party that used the filibuster for blockage were the Democrats blocking President Bush's appointments. That was stopped by the Gang of 14, with Senator McCain and Senator Lieberman joining each other.

President Obama is not going to have any problems getting a person with experienced passed, except if he goes to far Left, say Erwin Chemerinsky - someone who is a Leftist like President Obama. Sort of like the opposite of Judge Bork. The President is going to play this one safe and not do that. He is going to choose someone who is slightly Left of Center with experience. Especially, considering the current political climate that the President has created...not good.