• commentary
  • TUESDAY MAY 12 2009 6:00 AM

SCOTUS: Let’s Go Gay

Obama’s going to pick a Supreme Court nominee this year. This will be the first time we are going to have a justice picked by a non-asshole since the 90’s. Besides just a non-asshole, it’s the first time a president will pick a justice based on their credentials, instead of their insane right wing leanings and destructive business loving opinions. In all seriousness, if Justices Roberts and Alito could actually go down on corporations, they would. So this is a big deal. That’s why I think Obama should pick a gay woman. That doesn’t make sense after everything I just said, does it? Like I give a shit.

Let’s go gay. Let’s show the right wing what it feels like to watch an Alito take a seat on the bench. At least we can watch the right wing freak the fuck out and Senators filibuster for no other reason than because there might be a gay person on the bench. It’s a win-win. Do we have a gay woman who is qualified? Of course. Her name is Kathleen Sullivan.

Sullivan graduated from Cornell in 1976, did a little Oxford Scholar action for a couple of years, then graduated from Harvard Law School in 1981 (cough, cough, Obama, Harvard, cough). Harvard law professor Larry Tribe brought Sullivan on to work with him on a Supreme Court case and was quite impressed.

"Her sense of the most persuasive way to cast the issues and her rhetorical command were remarkable for any lawyer, much less a student. It was clear to me that I was dealing with the most extraordinary student I had ever had."



Sullivan went on to clerk for Judge James Oakes on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. She worked for a couple of years in Boston for a law firm and was then recruited by Harvard as a professor – where she taught, ahem, Constitutional Law. At the same time, she was working it as a lawyer.

She was co-counsel with Tribe for the Georgia ACLU in Bowers v. Hardwick, an unsuccessful 1986 challenge to Georgia’s sodomy law as a violation of privacy rights, and in Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, a successful 1984 defense of Hawaii’s land reform act against a taking clause challenge. Sullivan was the last attorney, following in a long line that began with James St. Clair ’44 (’47) and Professor Alan Dershowitz, to represent Frederick Wiseman in the "Titicut Follies" case, which has long been the basis of HLS’s federal litigation course. The case involved a gag order on a 1967 film about Bridgewater State Hospital; the gag order was finally lifted in 1991, when the judge decided that the subjects of the film would no longer be recognizable. Sullivan’s roster of cases also includes Anderson v. Green in which she made her second solo appearance before the Supreme Court in 1995, arguing on behalf of the right of newly entered poor mothers in California to receive AFDC benefits at the same level as longtime California residents. Sullivan says she won by virtue of mootness, and that the case is back on the Supreme Court docket this year.



Sullivan moved to Stanford Law School in 1993, where she became dean in 1999. In 2004, she stepped down as dean to become the director of the new Stanford constitutional law center. Oh, and she is the Stanley Morrison Professor at Stanford Law School. She is super qualified for the position. Oh, and she represented Mitch McConnell at one point. You know, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, also known as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. I’d love to watch Republicans mount a campaign against a supremely qualified lawyer who once represented their Minority Leader. It’s like a gift from God.

For Republicans it would come down to one thing: Her sexuality. And the time for this battle has come. Let’s watch our insane religious lunatic lawmakers try to take on an openly gay litigator who is far better than any of them.

A 1983 case Tribe and Sullivan worked on together involved defending the city of Boston’s policy of giving hiring preference to Boston residents on city construction projects. "I’m not sure I would have won without her," says Tribe, noting that he and Sullivan had a formidable opponent in Susan Estrich, who helped to represent the other side. "This was Susan’s first exposure to Kathleen, and Susan was immediately impressed by what a powerhouse we had in our midst." Estrich recalls having felt confident that her side would likely win the case, until she received a daunting reply brief coauthored by someone named Kathleen Sullivan: "I turned to my research assistant and said, ‘Who the hell is Kathleen Sullivan?’ I vowed never to be on the other side of this woman again. And I haven’t been. And I won’t be."



Kathleen Sullivan for SOTUS. Fucking bring it on.


FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday and Friday for more from FearTheReaper

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Next

Comments
Lucifer69133

Lucifer69133

I'm lost
February 2009

MAY 15, 2009 03:42 PM

Toku666 said:
*ahem* Remembering full well what happened the last time we disagreed, I surge forward anyhow. wink



I'm not as emotionally invested in this contention as I was with the whole magic thing i.e. it was not a serious comment. biggrin

Toku666said:
I have three names for you, each six letters in length:

Ronald. Wilson. Reagan.



Reagan loves you very much

He has to be most overrated American president in recent times. Even if you take on the fact that he was "very influential" and all that twaddle he did some seriously douchey things but people act as if he was the best thing since strippers. And he's not the best thing since strippers, not by a long mile. He reminds me of Maggie Thatcher.

/rant over.

dholokov

dholokov

Toronto, ON
April 2003

MAY 15, 2009 03:44 PM

Toku666 said:

Lucifer69133 said:
Oprah is the closest thing to a god America has.



*ahem* Remembering full well what happened the last time we disagreed, I surge forward anyhow. wink

I have three names for you, each six letters in length:

Ronald. Wilson. Reagan.



Surely both of these mythological figures could be worshipped within some polytheistic pantheon.

nicole_powers

nicole_powers

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

MAY 15, 2009 04:24 PM

I once got to meet Ronald Reagan. I'm not fan, he just happened to be somewhere I was.

Got to ask the onetime leader of the free world a question too!

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
"Is this seat taken?"

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

MAY 15, 2009 09:59 PM

nicole_powers said:
I hate to quote Faux News, so I'm quoting Buzzflash who tweeted this gem:

Crazy FOX "News" survey said 16% of the respondents thought Oprah would do a good job as SC justice.



Thoughts?



Well, she would satisfy the titular criterion of this thread.

TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

MAY 16, 2009 04:15 AM

Subrosa said:

nicole_powers said:
I hate to quote Faux News, so I'm quoting Buzzflash who tweeted this gem:

Crazy FOX "News" survey said 16% of the respondents thought Oprah would do a good job as SC justice.



Thoughts?



Well, she would satisfy the titular criterion of this thread.


I'm amazed 16% of FOX viewers would feel this way.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
I was going to say it'd be as anomalous as 16% of Republicans supporting a gay black woman in anything. But Condaleeza Rice! Hey-o!

Pip

Pip

Framingham, MA
OLD SKOOL

MAY 16, 2009 08:50 AM

TheFuckOffKid said:

Subrosa said:

nicole_powers said:
I hate to quote Faux News, so I'm quoting Buzzflash who tweeted this gem:

Crazy FOX "News" survey said 16% of the respondents thought Oprah would do a good job as SC justice.



Thoughts?



Well, she would satisfy the titular criterion of this thread.


I'm amazed 16% of FOX viewers would feel this way.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
I was going to say it'd be as anomalous as 16% of Republicans supporting a gay black woman in anything. But Condaleeza Rice! Hey-o!



Come on, you know W got a piece of that.

thefreak

thefreak

NEWSWIRE

Gardner, MA

MAY 16, 2009 12:38 PM

Pip said:

TheFuckOffKid said:
I'm amazed 16% of FOX viewers would feel this way.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
I was going to say it'd be as anomalous as 16% of Republicans supporting a gay black woman in anything. But Condaleeza Rice! Hey-o!



Come on, you know W got a piece of that.


It's hard out there for a pimpificator.

zoom image
-TM

Pip

Pip

Framingham, MA
OLD SKOOL

MAY 16, 2009 03:20 PM

thefreak said:

Pip said:

TheFuckOffKid said:
I'm amazed 16% of FOX viewers would feel this way.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
I was going to say it'd be as anomalous as 16% of Republicans supporting a gay black woman in anything. But Condaleeza Rice! Hey-o!



Come on, you know W got a piece of that.


It's hard out there for a pimpificator.

zoom image
-TM



The W stands for Win!

Brownize

Brownize

Frisco, TX
May 2009

MAY 17, 2009 08:46 AM

silversoul7 said:
As I understand it, Obama will most likely pick a Hispanic woman. Now, if there's a Hispanic gay woman he can pick, that would be really interesting.



Now why, exactly, does the gender, race or sexual orientation of the nominee even matter? Shouldn't you be looking for the candidate who will interpret the law as it was written, not how they believe it should be?

Pip

Pip

Framingham, MA
OLD SKOOL

MAY 17, 2009 12:03 PM

sarge13 said:

silversoul7 said:
As I understand it, Obama will most likely pick a Hispanic woman. Now, if there's a Hispanic gay woman he can pick, that would be really interesting.



Now why, exactly, does the gender, race or sexual orientation of the nominee even matter? Shouldn't you be looking for the candidate who will interpret the law as it was written, not how they believe it should be?



In the entire history of our country there have been exactly:
2 women
1 African-American
0 Asian-americans
0 Hispanics
0 Gays
a small number of Jewish men.

Now normally we could say "Let it be the best person", but when so much of the country has so little representation on the court, it's ok to narrow the field down a bit. Half of America are women, it would be nice if maybe more than 1 member of the Supreme Court were a woman as well. But If you like the monopoly on power that rich old white men have had, then status quo is the way to go.

Priapos

priapos

San Angelo, TX
October 2005

MAY 17, 2009 12:40 PM

2 African-americans

0 "Out" Gays, but we don't actually know how many closeted homosexuals

TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

MAY 17, 2009 02:46 PM

sarge13 said:
Shouldn't you be looking for the candidate who will interpret the law as it was written, not how they believe it should be?


All written law gets interpreted in ways that can be regarded as subjective.

If all law was totally clear and unambiguous, there would be no legal disputes.

dholokov

dholokov

Toronto, ON
April 2003

MAY 17, 2009 04:54 PM

sarge13 said:

silversoul7 said:
As I understand it, Obama will most likely pick a Hispanic woman. Now, if there's a Hispanic gay woman he can pick, that would be really interesting.



Now why, exactly, does the gender, race or sexual orientation of the nominee even matter? Shouldn't you be looking for the candidate who will interpret the law as it was written, not how they believe it should be?



Hopefully you mean "provide world-class jurisprudence, with due regard for both written legislation and the common law."

As your actual question, I think we should take it as a given that people pressing for a minority believe that there is a large pool of top-notch candidates available and paying favourable attention to minority status wouldn't mean going with a lesser pick.

Otoki

Otoki

SUICIDEGIRL

Minnesota, USA

MAY 21, 2009 06:08 AM

dholokov said:

sarge13 said:

silversoul7 said:
As I understand it, Obama will most likely pick a Hispanic woman. Now, if there's a Hispanic gay woman he can pick, that would be really interesting.



Now why, exactly, does the gender, race or sexual orientation of the nominee even matter? Shouldn't you be looking for the candidate who will interpret the law as it was written, not how they believe it should be?



Hopefully you mean "provide world-class jurisprudence, with due regard for both written legislation and the common law."

As your actual question, I think we should take it as a given that people pressing for a minority believe that there is a large pool of top-notch candidates available and paying favourable attention to minority status wouldn't mean going with a lesser pick.


This.

Paisley

Paisley

USA
September 2006

MAY 21, 2009 11:54 AM

Toku666 said:

Sociodrunk said:
in the states, the left wing have not come of age yet. just wait, though.

the french fry incident is NOTHING!



In the States, the "left wing" will not "come of age" within our lifetimes.

The french fry incident indicates that we have a Chief Justice that will side with a police officer over a 12-year-old. "She was coming right at me with that french fry!" wink


Was that the case in D.C.? If it is: there's no food allowed on the Metro, it's clearly posted, and the girl was being extremely rude and disrespectful to the police officer who had first asked her to get rid of the fries. She got arrested for being a smartass and for having food on the Metro. If this isn't what you're talking about: wtf?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Next