Next Supreme Court Justice: OBama Leaning Towards Sidney Thomas

[Obama 2012 1,714]

(AP) President Barack Obama has accelerated his search for his next Supreme Court nominee, meeting in the Oval Office with one of the candidates, federal judge Sidney Thomas of Montana, a person familiar with the conversation says.

Obama's meeting with Thomas on Thursday was his first known formal interview for the upcoming vacancy on the court. He is holding conversations with other candidates, and it is not clear whether he has already had other personal meetings with contenders.

Vice President Joe Biden interviewed Thomas at the White House in a separate meeting Thursday, said the person familiar with the conversations, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Obama's private deliberations.

The White House had no comment. A call to Thomas' chambers was not answered.

The personal time Obama devoted to Thomas suggests that the federal judge, well respected within legal circles but hardly a familiar name in Washington, is under a higher level of consideration by the president.

The news of his interview by the president and vice president works to the White House's advantage in signaling that Obama is giving a hard review to a candidate who comes from outside the Washington Beltway and does not neatly fit into conventional wisdom.

The court is dominated by justices with ties to the Northeast and the Ivy League; Thomas' career is rooted in the West - he lives in Billings, Montana, and earned his bachelor's degree from Montana State University and his law degree from the University of Montana.

The 56-year-old judge serves on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the largest of the nation's appellate courts. He was nominated to that job in July 1995 by President Bill Clinton and confirmed by the Senate with no controversy.

The San Francisco-based appeals court on which he serves has a liberal reputation, but attorneys who know Thomas describe him as independent and a straight-shooter.

Obama is choosing a nominee to replace Justice John Paul Stevens, who is retiring this summer.

Obama's pick is not expected to upend the court's balance of power - four on the left, four on the right, one in the middle. Stevens, the retiring justice, is the leader of the court's liberals.

Thomas' name has been on Obama's known list of court contenders for more than two weeks. But the predictably intense speculation about who Obama will pick has centered on other names - chiefly Solicitor General Elena Kagan and federal appeals court judges Diane Wood and Merrick Garland.

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said earlier this week that Obama would be talking to candidates this week, but the White House has declined to characterize those conversations.

The president has been considering about 10 people as potential nominees.

Among the others are federal appeals court judge Ann Williams, former Georgia Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Harvard Law School Dean Martha Minow.

Obama is expected to choose his nominee within a couple of weeks.

He already went through the formal interview process last year with three of the current top contenders - Wood, Kagan and Napolitano - before nominating Sonia Sotomayor in May 2009 to replace Justice David Souter.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/30/politics/main6447359.shtml

[Obama 2012 1,714]

6 Things to Know About Supreme Court Short-Listee Sidney Thomas

(April 20) -- Among the names being floated to replace Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, there's rising buzz surrounding one who hadn't been on the short-short list of early front-runners: Judge Sidney R. Thomas, who serves on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. How'd this dark horse wind up in the "elite" part of the potential nominee pool, as The Associated Press has reported, and what would he bring to the high court? Here are six things to know:

1. He's not from Chicago. Many of the names being floated were either born in the Windy City or, more often, studied or taught at the University of Chicago Law School, where President Barack Obama himself taught. Thomas, by contrast, was born in Montana and graduated from the University of Montana School of Law in 1978. He "may not have the traditional Eastern elite background of a Supreme Court justice, but Montanans who work with him say it would be hard to find a better candidate for the highest court," cheers Montana's largest paper, the Billings Gazette. Currently, eight of the sitting justices on the Supreme Court attended Ivy League schools, and Thomas would be the first Montanan to serve on the nation's highest court.

2. He's a First Amendment specialist. During his years as a private attorney, Thomas, who was appointed to the 9th Circuit Court by President Bill Clinton and confirmed in 1996, represented NBC, CNN and other media outlets.

3. He's been known not to mince words. Thomas authored the 9th Circuit Court's 2006 ruling in Nadarajah v. Gonzales, which released Sri Lankan citizen and suspected terrorist Ahilan Nadarajah, who had been in immigration detention for four years on the basis of testimony of a secret witness in Canada. Thomas' opinion was withering:

"Starting at age 17, Ahilan Nadarajah was repeatedly tortured in Sri Lanka. He fled to the United States, where he was detained upon arrival. He applied for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Twice, the government's arguments against the grant of immigration relief have been rejected and Nadarajah has been awarded relief by an immigration judge. This decision was affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Yet the government continues to detain Nadarajah, who has now been imprisoned for almost five years despite having prevailed at every administrative level of review and who has never been charged with any crime. We order that a writ of habeas corpus issue, and that he be released on appropriate conditions during the pendency of any further proceedings."

4. He's ruled on behalf of the little guy. Thomas also authored the 9th Circuit's 2004 opinion affirming a lower-court ruling in MGM Studios v. Grokster. The case concerned copyright law and peer-to-peer file sharing, and the court drew on the precedent of earlier cases, including two involving Napster. Thomas wrote that the software distribution companies were not liable for copyright violations, since their software could also be used to distribute material lawfully, a precedent established in the famous Betamax case. But the Supreme Court voted unanimously to set aside Thomas' decision and found that Grokster could be held liable.

5. He has something in common with Arlo Guthrie. From 1982 to 1995, Thomas taught law at Rocky Mountain College in Billings. One its most notable students is the famous folk singer, who attended the school but never graduated.

6. He may not be as liberal as some might think. The 9th Circuit is the largest appeals court and is also generally perceived as the most liberal. But a former conservative Republican law partner of Thomas' says the judge's views aren't so easy to categorize. "I wouldn't class Sid Thomas with the 9th Circuit," Bernard Longo has said. "I know he's in it, but I don't think he's as rabid as that bunch."

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/6-things-to-know-about-supreme-court-short-listee-sidney-thomas/19446822

[Heracles 417]

It's amazing to me how much power the US supreme courts yield over the direction and fate of the country. Purely based on the opinion of a judge.

Certainly not something I am used to from abroad.

[scandal 951]

"I wouldn't class Sid Thomas with the 9th Circuit," Bernard Longo has said. "I know he's in it, but I don't think he's as rabid as that bunch."

Yes, yes, rabid-shmabid, but does he have "empathy"?

[Pooky 3,784]

Sounds like a reasonable choice to me.

Probably means the far right (not conservative enough) or the far left (not liberal enough) will throw a spanner in the works and prevent him being confirmed.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Sounds like a reasonable choice to me.

Probably means the far right (not conservative enough) or the far left (not liberal enough) will throw a spanner in the works and prevent him being confirmed.

Only thing that bugs me about him, is the fact he's had one of his cases overturned by the SCOTUS before.

I mean, that should pretty much be an automatic disqualification in my book for being on the high court.

Look at Sotomayor, she had several cases overturned and now she gets to pass judgment on said cases?

Our whole system is completely jacked up when you look at that aspect of things.

People who shouldn't have been making rulings in the first place obviously, now have the be all end all of sayings on an issue that they obviously don't know how to look at in a proper manner.