Legalities
Life, Politics and the Law From ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg
Jan Crawford Greenburg is a correspondent for ABC News' bureau in Washington DC. She covers politics, the Supreme Court and provides legal analysis for ABC News. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago's law school and is a member of the New York bar.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
General Garre
June 02, 2008 3:29 PM
Today is Paul Clement’s last as Solicitor General, and the White House moved quickly to tap a replacement: Deputy Solicitor General Gregory Garre. The White House announced this afternoon that President Bush would nominate Garre to be the administration's top lawyer before the Court.
It was a safe move by a White House juggling all sorts of problems and controversies and congressional hearings.
Garre, 43, learned the ropes as deputy over the past three years—both inside the office and arguing before the justices. He’s argued 23 cases before the Court, and he comes with an impressive resume, having clerked for the late Chief Justice Rehnquist and worked at Hogan & Hartson with the current one.
But equally important to an administration under siege is that Garre is unlikely to light any kind of spark with Senate Democrats. Senators looking for a fight won’t find much there.
Of course, Garre’s going to be stepping into some pretty big shoes, and he’d be the first to say so. Clement is considered one of the best appellate advocates of his generation. He’s off to teach at Georgetown and contemplate his next move, as law firms all over DC (and in New York) plot ways to lure him over to head up their appellate practices.
And Clement, in Court this morning for the last time as SG after nearly four years of holding the title, got a nice send off from the Chief.
“The Court recognizes the significant responsibilities that were placed on him to represent the government of the United States before this court and to perform other important functions on behalf of the executive branch,” Roberts said. “On behalf of my colleagues, I thank you, General Clement, for a job well done. You have our sincere appreciation and best wishes for the future.”
June 2, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (4)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Maybe, hopefully in the next 4 years or so we will be referring to Paul Clement as Justice Clement. Let's hope it's to replace one of the left-wing liberals on the Supreme Court!
Posted by: Liberal hater | Jun 2, 2008 5:26:03 PM
I am always perplexed why the "conservatives" (Or social totalitarians) are so concerned with the political leanings of the Supreme Court Justices, when the majority of them were nominated by Republican Presidents.
Posted by: The Confused | Jun 2, 2008 7:19:49 PM
It's simple really, liberal left-wing justices like Ginsburg, Stevens, and Souter legislate from the bench. Conservative justices do not.
And who the hell cares if it's a Republican President who makes a idiotic decision like putiing that moron Davis Souter on the bench.
Eisenhower's worst mistake was Earl Warren.
Nixon's worst mistake(s) were Brennan and Blackmun.
Ford's worst mistake was Stevens.
Reagan worst mistake was O'Conner.
Bush Sr. horrible mistake was Souter.
All Republican nominees but they turned out to be liberal activist judges.
Liberals are socialist, communist, who hate every thing good about this country and want to see it destroyed.
Liberalism is a sickness that needs to be eradicated.
It's liberals who are the totalitarians and fascist. Please no sissy responses.
Posted by: Liberal hater | Jun 2, 2008 11:33:37 PM
Who says I was a liberal? I am equally critical to both conservatism and liberalism. If you call my critical view of conservatism sissy, then I give you my standing ovation for your judgment, assuming that you have read the true origins of your own ideology and know the strength and the weakness of your thought. I am still just an ignorant fool trying to figure things out, so I am currently unaffiliated.
But my question is this. If you cannot trust even a conservative President to put true conservative justices on the Supreme Court with true certainty, then what's your real strategy in advancing your cause?
By the way, will you admit that Keynesian economics be part of socialism?
Cheers!
Posted by: The Confused | Jun 3, 2008 12:08:42 AM
Post a comment
