General Question

janbb's avatar

What do you think of the idea of Elizabeth Warren as a Supreme Court nominee?

Asked by janbb (57164points) March 9th, 2016

Let’s discount what we know – that the Senate will not even consider or approve her (or anyone else, it seems.) Would this be a good choice for the Court? Would it be the best use of her abilities?

I had seen her name floated as a possibility and would love to see another woman on the Court. I have some questions about it and am just curious to hear other reactions.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

24 Answers

stanleybmanly's avatar

It’s a wonderful idea for more reasons than you can shake a stick at.

jaytkay's avatar

I would like to her to stay in the Senate, rather than being restricted to working on the few cases that land in the Supreme Court.

There are plenty of good candidates for the court who would do as well as Warren. There are few Senators willing and able to do what she does.

Hawaii_Jake's avatar

I do not know more about Senator Warren than what I read in the news. From the little I’ve read, I’m not sure she has the temperament to be a Supreme Court justice. She seems very well suited to life in the Senate. Perhaps as a cabinet secretary some day. Maybe president? I guess I see her as a politician.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The thing about Warren is that there is absolutely no mistaking her ideology. The reason I find her candidacy appealing is that it puts those most prone to resist it in the VERY uncomfortable position of explaining their opposition to it.

janbb's avatar

I’m crazy about her and think she does have both the intelligence and the judiciousness to be a great Justice but like @jaytkay I think perhaps she is more useful to us in the Senate. She would have been my choice for Democratic Presidential candidate and I would love to see her run in the future.

Hawaii_Jake's avatar

@janbb, you may very well be correct in that she might indeed have what it takes to be a great justice. I only know what I read in the papers. (Apologies to Mr. Truman.)

janbb's avatar

@Hawaii_Jake If you want, just look at some videos of her talks on FB. She is passionate about her beliefs but very reasoned and logical.

LostInParadise's avatar

I far prefer to see Warren as senator and maybe one day as president.

Shouldn’t a Supreme Court justice have training and experience in the law?

Hawaii_Jake's avatar

She taught law at Harvard.

tinyfaery's avatar

We need her where she is. Then we need her to be POTUS. Then she can join the Supremes.

janbb's avatar

@tinyfaery Sounds like a good plan!

Seek's avatar

@lost – Warren was a law professor for 20 years, and this is just her first term in the Senate.

CWOTUS's avatar

Better than Obama, by this much »«.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Her expertise is in bankruptcy and commercial law. That seems narrow for a legal background. I’d be more comfortable with someone who had more exposure to first amendment, fifth amendment, and human issues.

I’m also troubled that she has never been a judge. While that isn’t essential, I think it helps.

Cruiser's avatar

I agree with @Hawaii_Jake. I think she has been in the political trenches far too long to not be tainted or biased to where her decisions could be 110% impartial.

janbb's avatar

@Cruiser She’s a relatively new Senator but she definitely has opinions on right and wrong.

But here’s a question: Which judges can you point to that are 110% impartial? They may skew right and they may skew left but I can’t think of one that I would call impartial.

Cruiser's avatar

@janbb Just the fact that she is a Junior senator is where I have a problem. We are talking about a SCOTUS justice position and why would you or whoever is promoting Senators for this exalted job when there are hundreds of actual justices across our county who are better qualified to take the position of justice on the SCOTUS?? A junior senator was President was an epic failure and I respectfully think we need to start looking at people with credentials that qualify them for these high impact positions in our government. Time to stop playing games with political appointees that only affect us all.

josie's avatar

One is as good as another. As long as they reasonable, who cares.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

I would support her in almost any leadership role she took on, but I would definitely like her to be wherever she good pack the most punch. I’m still sad that she didn’t run for President.

janbb's avatar

@DrasticDreamer Me too.

@Cruiser I don’t disagree with you; I just thought it was interesting to speculate about when I read that the idea had been floated.

Cruiser's avatar

Thanks for the clarification @janbb…I feel she could bring a large amount of currency to a Dem Presidential candidate as VP and I would not be surprised if she is waiting in the wings for just this.

janbb's avatar

@Cruiser I would love to see her as a VP candidate – and not for Trump! :-)

DrasticDreamer's avatar

*could… Wow, brainfart!

dappled_leaves's avatar

I agree with @jaytkay. She is more useful elsewhere.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther