« More truly terrible music | Main | The NUCULAR option »

April 09, 2005

Clinton for Supreme Court: did the Voice get punk'd?

The Village Voice writes this week that Karl Rove is hatching a devilish scheme to thwart Hillary Clinton's presidential ambitions by having George W. Bush nominate Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court.  The idea would be that when Chief Justice Rehnquist retires (presumably at the end of the Court's current term) Bush nominates Thomas or Scalia to be Chief, and then nominates Clinton to fill the seat vacated by Thomas or Scalia.  And, the thinking supposedly goes, the country would never stand to have Clintons at the apex of two branches of government, so Hillary could never be President.  This brilliant scheme also breaks the judicial logjam, because Senate minority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) agrees to relent on Bush's appeals court nominations in exchange for majority leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) agreeing to approve Clinton.

The Voice claims that this wacky scheme was floated in a Bob Novak column.  I've looked hard for the column, but I can't find it.  And the idea started bouncing around the internet suspiciously close to the beginning of April, which leads me to think that the Voice is the victim of an April Fools joke. 

Because really, let's think about this.  Justly or not, Clinton's Arkansas law license was suspended for five years as a result of Monicagate, and he resigned from the bar of the Supreme Court rather than face disbarment proceedings there.  It would be a bit odd to have someone sitting on a Court before which he could not practice.  And, of course, nothing would send Bush's "base" further through the roof than the prospect of their arch-nemesis sitting on the Supreme Court - it would be the end of today's Republican party.  So there's no freakin' way this is going to happen, nor is there any way that Rove is considering it.  Still, it's fun to think about.

Posted by David at 11:02 PM in Law and Lawyers | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Clinton for Supreme Court: did the Voice get punk'd?:


Was the date for the original story April 1st?

Posted by: Peter Dolan | Apr 10, 2005 9:22:40 AM

I have not been able to determine that - supposedly this rumor originated in "The Hotline," a Washington insider publication that is only available to subscribers. The Voice article is dated April 5.

Posted by: David | Apr 10, 2005 9:31:20 AM

Very funny April's fools joke.
But, as an attorney,david, do you thibk Clinton should be disbared for Monicagate?

Posted by: The troll | Apr 10, 2005 9:36:25 AM

You bring up an interesting point about Clinton. It's funny. I want to point out that there's nothing in the Constitution that requires a Sup. Ct. nominee to be a practicing lawyer, or even a lawyer at all, to serve on the Court. I think the problem with the nomination would be political -- wingnuts hate Clinton -- rather than legal.

Posted by: Kepherin | Apr 11, 2005 11:25:44 AM

Taft made the transition, why not Bubba?

Posted by: Blue Brother | Apr 12, 2005 2:33:32 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.