SCOTUS and 270

Some Blue Staters are making the case that the DC v. Heller decision is a benefit for Barack Obama, since it gave the gun owning community the result they wanted. See here, the usually sensible Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe

By ending the debate over whether the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own guns, the justices have just made it safer for gun owners to vote Democratic. McCain cheered the court's ruling, but Obama may prove the biggest winner of all.

 http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/06/29/a_silver_bullet_for_obama/

The problem with this argument is the rather obvious fact to any casual observer that the right to bear arms was upheld by a single vote. Had Chief Justice Roberts cobbled together a 6-3 or 7-2 majority for even a more milquetoast affirmance of the DC Circuit, this issue would have been put to bed once and for all.  Alas, Justice Breyer has preserved the political relevance of the National Rifle Association.

A number of other obvious facts come to mind. As President, Barack Obama would certainly nominate clones of Justice Breyer and we can assume from past performance the GOP senate caucus would rubber stamp any nominee barring an ethical meltdown.  Justice Scalia is not getting any younger and is probably even odds to retire within the next eight years, and the sad demise of Tim Russert at 58 means we can't guarantee Roberts, Alito and Thomas longevity. So a President Obama would place Heller in a position to be overruled or emasculated by a future court,(just as Lawrence overruled Bowers) and this is easy to figure out.. Folks like Jacoby seriously underestimate the sophistication of the sportsman's lobby, but what else is new?

Looking politically Chris Palko accurately points out that the presidential election will be decided in the "Big Ten" states.   http://www.thenextright.com/blog/579 . What do we know about these states? Well, they have powerful pro-gun  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50527-2004Oct21.html  and pro-life http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE4D6133FF93AA25754C0A964958260 voter blocs.

They have not been associated with affirmative action. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/09/us/politics/09michigan.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/L/Lewin,%20Tamar .

 The blue collar electorates in these states also have been  opposed to open borders  http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/11/ohio_voters_weigh_in_on_immigr.html and gay marriage http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/01/22/loc_gaymarriage.html 

Needless to say, judicial nominees favored by Senator Obama http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/06/020846.php would be almost certain to rule adversely to public opinion on these issues.  We have heard little from the constitutional law scholar on whether he favors popular supremacy or judicial supremacy, or on whether he believes in a "living constitution".  And these argument may be a bit abstract. But putting a name and a face on the table isn't.

Mac's campaign hasn;t shown a lot of message discipline, so let me suggest some for him. Right after the V.P. selection he ought to announce who is his pick for the first Supreme Court vacancy he will fill as President.  This person ought to be a rock solid conservative legal thinker, but with real world legal experience. The nominee ought not to be a white male. And the nominee should have a track record of proven electoral success in a politically important state.

There is such a person. She is a former urban criminal court judge. She has won a statewide judicial election. Her legal opinions are sound and based on textual interpretation of the law, not something akin Justice Kennedy's sense of 'standards of decency".  She is in her early 50's and could serve a long time. Her nomination to the federal bench was supported by prominent local Democrats. She is a Catholic from a blue collar region.

John McCain should announce that Diane Sykes, Judge of U.S. 7th Circuit Court, will be his most likely choice for a Supreme Court vacancy.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_S._Sykes http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=3074

The bottom line here is we put our cards right out on the table. The Obama camp will be forced to present their favored candidate. If they go for a Souter-esq cipher the netroots  will howl about betrayal; if they advance a liberal the emptiness of Obama's rhetoric on recent cases will be betrayed. If they choose not to play this game and attack Sykes they will alienate professional women, Catholics and WI voters.  

Also, demographically Judge Sykes, a suburban Rust Belt Catholic woman is exactly the "sweet spot" in the 2008 American electorate. 

The McCain camp needs to put the choice squarely before the American public. I have faith if they do so, they will be rewarded.  Trying to win this battle over semantics and abstractions is a far dicier proposition.