President Obama ready to make his choice for Supreme Court

President Obama says his first nomination of a new Supreme Court justice is imminent - and he feels no pressure to appoint a woman to the prized post.

"I don't feel weighed down by having to choose a Supreme Court justice based on demographics. I certainly think that ultimately we want a Supreme Court that is reflective of the incredible variety of the American people," Obama said in a 30-minute C-SPAN interview that aired Saturday.

Obama, who could announce his pick to replace departing Justice David Souter as early as this week, says he hopes to have confirmation hearings in July.

What he doesn't want to see is someone having to "hit the ground running and then take their seat in October without having the time to wrap their mind around the fact that they are going to be a Supreme Court justice," he said.

The President, a former law professor, says he will seek a new justice who possesses both intellect and a common-sense approach to the law's application.

Asked if he'd have an interest in serving on the court himself after the presidency - as William Howard Taft did - Obama joked, "I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation."

ckatz@nydailynews.com
Ads by Yahoo!

Leading Hamptons Rental Beach Locations
Choice of short-term Hamptons Rentals with pools near ocean beaches.
(www.hamptonsvacations.com)

Compare North Carolina
Bridal Store Prices. 20-30% Sale on Dresses. Guaranteed delivery dates.
(www.BestBridalPrices.com)

To post comments, REGISTER or LOG IN

gwright May 24, 2009 10:20:04 AM Report Offensive Post
That is wrong. The Bill of Rights was only left out initially because they couldn't agree upon the wording, and didn't want to hold up the progress of the Constitution. The ideas they all agreed upon initially.

gwright May 24, 2009 10:21:54 AM Report Offensive Post
Obamaboarding: The torture experienced when listening to Obama speak. Obamaboarding IS torture!

jbobtex May 24, 2009 1:39:59 PM Report Offensive Post
Don't count out Nobel Prize Winner and former Veep Al Gore whose politically strong Tennessee father told close friends around us at last mid-century that son Al was going places. Could he be our next Supreme Court justice?

TALKS ALOT May 24, 2009 3:24:05 PM Report Offensive Post
IT IS GOING TO BE THE WOMEN THAT IS IN CHARGE OF KEEPING US SAFE(PALINONTO) DON'T KNOW HOW TO SPELL IT, BUT HE WANTS HER OUT OF SECURITY SO HE CAN GET SOMEONE IN THERE THAT WILL BE ON HIS SIDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bboy1953 May 24, 2009 9:04:05 PM Report Offensive Post
gwright...that is a classic....obamaboarding...I love it....and the head of the DHS is Napolicannoli....what a spineless fraud she is....she won't even say the word terrorist unless she's talking about white guys

Kings County Doc May 24, 2009 9:17:16 PM Report Offensive Post
bboy:Thanks! doc. I am old, work for living, and cannot stay up 'till 3 AM like the democrat posters. Does "down" have a real job?

Dr.D May 24, 2009 9:24:25 PM Report Offensive Post
Imo,if Obama really wants to restore respect and deference to the precepts of the Constitution that he swore to defend, he should choose a proponent of taking the ideas and ideals of the Constitution literally, as people such as Andrew Napolitano would. Otherwise,he's just playing partisan politics.

Pyrrhus May 24, 2009 9:54:32 PM Report Offensive Post
jbotex: interesting comment. I'm a Republican, but I could get behind Gore as a Supreme nominee. He has all of the qualifications that our President mentioned in his CNBC interview and I believe he would make a good Justice because he has been politically free from partisan politics since his failed presidential attempt almost nine years ago. But who knows who the actual nominee will be?!

Pyrrhus May 24, 2009 10:02:12 PM Report Offensive Post
Dr.D: I agree with you, too. But people have to realize that there is a difference between, as you said, the ideas and ideals of the Constitution and taking the Constitution literally. The founding fathers could not have imagined America as it currently exists, so the ideals are what should matter Constitutionally today.