With all the talk about what Presidents can and cannot do, former and possibly future candidate Governor Rick Perry comes up with the hidden prize, speaking at a South Carolina barbeque, courtesy Sahil Kapur @ Bloomberg Politics:
“Something I want you all to think about is that the next president of the United States, whoever that individual may be, could choose up to three, maybe even four members of the Supreme Court,” he said. “Now this isn’t about who’s going to be the president of the United States for just the next four years. This could be about individuals who have an impact on you, your children, and even our grandchildren. That’s the weight of what this election is really about.” …
Though few contenders have emphasized the Supreme Court as a factor in 2016, the magnitude of the issue wasn’t lost on at least some in the crowd, who responded with a mix of sighs and approving laughter at his proposition. On Election Day, three out of nine sitting justices will be at least 80 years old, and a fourth will be 78. The average retirement age for a U.S. Supreme Court justice is 78.7, a 2006 study in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy found.
Enhancing the question is whether SCOTUS justices will still retire at that age, on average, if medical science finds a way to lengthen the human lifespan in a meaningful way. Anyone for a Justice Kennedy at age 110?
Ian Millhiser at ThinkProgress summarizes two possibilities: Clinton and Perry.
If Hillary Clinton, or someone with similar views, has the opportunity to replace four justices, these new jurists will be joined by the relatively youthful Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. That’s enough votes to overrule Hobby Lobby, ensure that anti-gay businesses do not gain a right to ignore federal law, reinvigorate reproductive choice, and potentially to shut off the flood of wealthy donors’ money into elections. It would also halt efforts to undermine the Affordable Care Act and shut down other legislation unpopular among Republicans through novel interpretations of the law and the Constitution.
If someone like Perry selects the next slate of four justices, on the other hand, America could be in for a wild ride. Perry has argued that Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and federal clean air laws are all unconstitutional. He signed unconstitutional legislation purporting to nullify federal regulation of light bulbs. In a 2010 book, Perry also describes New Deal era Supreme Court decisions permitting labor regulation such as the minimum wage as “the second big step in the march of socialism.”
There seems to be a lot of certainty about SCOTUS overturning previous decisions – something, in all its incarnations, it has been reluctant to do. (Coming up with exact figures is difficult; see Ronald Standler for more information on the subject.) Still, this is the sort of issue that may bring out the bases on both sides.
