Why didn't Bush nominate Scalia for CJ?

[AlCzervik]

i really have no clue. Is it is close relationship to Cheney or is there something else?

[Beware the Beast Man]

1. One reason: age.

Roberts is considerably younger, therefore can sit on the bench as CJ for decades. :(

[Silverhair]

2. Youth. Roberts will be CJ for a longer time than Scalia could. NT

[boston bean]

3. Scalia said he would quit if Bush didn't make hime head honcho

I can't find a link. I know he said it, I wonder what scalia will do?

[Fenris]

4. 1) Too old (69)

2) Guaranteed a tough confirmation hearing

[AlCzervik]

7. i thought maybe it was age but i think there must be something else

Scalia would serve until he died so that could be at least another 15 years if he's in good health.

[Fenris]

11. I think it has to do with Scalia's candor...

Like I said, he would face a tough confirmation fight.

[SoCalDem]

14. 15 years from now a democrat could be in office

He wants to put a 50 yr old "in charge", and probably is counting on Pat Robertson's prayers to be answered.. there are two very old justices, and ginsberg has had health problems..(cancer, I think)..

*² is counting on TWO more appointments before he slithers back into the weeds:puke:

[Booster]

17. The age answer just doesn't fly since the new Pope is in his 80's.

[AlCzervik]

18. I think the Pope was picked because of his age.

I don't the Vatican wants this pope to have a 25 year reign.

[Booster]

20. So doesn't that same thing apply here? I don't think we want

Roberts to have a 30 year reign. Personally, I think the Pope was too old and Roberts is too young. Hard to please me, ha.

[smoogatz]

5. Good question.

I'm not sure the youth factor fully explains it. This is definitely a slap in the face to Tony the Fixer.

[calico1]

6. If age is the reason then its a stupid reason.

Just because he is younger who is to say he won't get a heart attack, cancer or get hit by a bus? Just sayin...

[Warren Stupidity]

8. Originalists can box themselves into a corner

They want a compliant fascist not a strict constructionist. Also age etc are all valid reasons.

[Minstrel Boy]

9. Only age. And I'm sure Scalia

agrees with the decision.

Agenda trumps ego.

[Massacure]

12. You sure about agenda trumping ego?

Bush has a pretty big ego.

[alfredo]

10. Scalia is too liberal for bush

Actually, it is easier to put Roberts there and then deal with the O'Conner replacement later.

[Walt Starr]

13. Two reasons, Roberts could serve as long as 40 years

possibly even fifty given medical advances.

Second reason, the confirmation process was already underway looking like it was a slam dunk in favor of confirmation.

[AlCzervik]

15. but wouldn't it be easier to have Roverts replace O'Conner, make Scalia CJ

and then when Scalia retires Roberts could be elevated then if we have a GOP President-----God forbid we do but you know what i mean. Roberts doesn't really have a very long track record as a judge. I'm not advocating for Scalia here BTW but sometimes the devil you know is better then the one you don't.

[charlie]

19. No, not easier

Nominating someone else for CJ means an extra hearing. With Roberts, he gets a twofer.

[jmatthan]

16. Somebody younger that Bush

to ensure that Bush is not brought to justice for war crimes during his lifetime?

[ngGale]

21. JMO, but for what it's worth...

Roberts was groomed for this position. All *'s nominees have two things in common - "Imminent Domain" and the "Commerce Clause."
Other than Robert's being young, he has an ace in the hole. He worked under Reagan with "Iran-Contra." He's the one who will control the Plame fall out, whatever that might be!

[Ouabache]

22. he is appointing the presiding officer for his impeachment trial, right?

He knows or has been told who would be best for that one.

[mitchum]

23. Because Clarence Thomas hits like a little girl?

even a coward like bush wouldn't fear Thomas' rage on Fat Tony's behalf