She'd be the one who'd drive us all nuts by always siding with the right-wing nutcases to prove how tough she is.

She'd make Tony Scalia look like Daffy freakin' Duck.

she's fine as Senator. its a way easier job.

Remember when Harriet Fucking Meirs was being considered by Bush and how everyone here flipped a motherfucking wig about it? How is this any different except for POV on Constitutional issues?

Now, who else to appoint? That's my question ... it's a lifetime appointment.

I've heard worse ideas. And the fact that several republicans have not had the following experience doesn't make it ok.

I'd much prefer someone with a more varied civil background (#15 - she did have significant practice in the private sector), and someone who had actually run a trial court. The scholarchip angle bothers me less - that's what clerks are for.

And she'd never get confirmed in a million billion years.

But I've heard worse.

Plus, Hillary said Bill Clinton wasn't responsible for all the bad stuff in NAFTA; Bill "inherited" it from GHW Bush and had to live with it. And she said her Iraq war vote wasn't really a vote for war. And her border fence vote wasn't really a vote to build a border fence. Come to think of it, is she even qualified to vote on bills in the Senate?

I could see it.

She isn't qualified to be a justice except for having a similar view point to almost everyone on slog. Judges, if anything, should be elected on experience, scholarship, and everything but having people agree with her ideals as a politician. and I dont think anyone here could make the case that they truly want her there because she knows her shit when it comes to law(because there are more qualified people out there), but because they agree with her politically on several issues. They want Clinton to make a point and that is the worst reason to be on the Supreme Court.

Toss in Bill Richardson as VP, and you have two women, an African-American, and an Hispanic in the top 4 seats of power in the country.

I say challenge her senate seat in the next primary and let her retire with Bill and their millions.

@26 And I also don't think Bill Clinton is disqualified by being disbarred, is he? As long as he meets the Constitutional requirements and is appointed and confirmed...

And, yes. I say this because I want to be assured that she will be likely to rule in accord with my beliefs.

Obama needs to make her Secretary of State!!!

How about 1000 hours of community service for the flag-burning amendment, 500 for the Iran vote, and 5000 for the Iraq vote, then let her teach civics to 8th graders.

President Clinton will definitely consult with Vice President Obama when the time comes to fill a SCOTUS vacancy.

But

I agree with #5– she's too old. However, from the article Sullivan links to it appears that most of the Democratic Farm Team is around the same age. So if they can get someone younger, appoint them. If they can't, why not Hillary?

We need to fix the Supreme Court. We should increase the number of justices to 11 and give each of them a staggered 22 year term. That way a retirement comes due ever two years, meaning that each president would get to pick two Supreme Court justices (we'd have to figure out what to do in the case of a death to keep things balanced). Doing this would do a lot to remove the excessive partisanship from court appointments and would also eliminate the phenomenon of senile judges hanging on long after they should have retired (Blackmun, Marshall, Rehnquist, etc).

I'd like to see more politicians appointed to the court. Let's face it, the court is already political and as others have pointed out some of the best justices were elected officials before they were appointed to the Court. Earl Warren comes to mind (Jim Newton's book "Justice for All - Earl Warren And The Nation He Made" is brilliant) and there's also William Howard Taft and Charles Evans Hughes. I can't imagine any of them citing 24 like Wop Tony Scalia did as being relevant to Constitutional jurisprudence.

The republicans would shit themselves at the idea. Unless the Democrats manage to pull of a supermajority, she has no hope of ever being confirmed.

More realistically, she'd make a good Majority Leader. Harry Ried has been a disgrace.

Jeez, am I smart or what?

Being a Supreme means getting votes from the Repubs, and how does anyone think that'll happen? Hell has not yet frozen over.

I think Hillary would make an excellent Justice, but I don't necessarily see the long term benefit in appointing a woman of her age, particularly when there are extremely good younger choices -- who are also women and also Hispanic (see Wardlaw and Sotomayor.) I hate that we even have to THINK about the age of justices, but she's older than Roberts, Alito AND Thomas. So that's just a fact.

A. She'd never get confirmed.
B. She wouldn't take it because she will run for president again.
C. I would rather John Edwards be given a SCOTUS spot and I don't even like him all that much.

But still, I guess my main problem is I think SCOTUS is already bordering on being way too politically motivated as it is

You and me both, LMSW@41.