New standard for SC nominations

Courtesy of Derrick Z. Jackson at the Boston Globe. Hugh Hewitt and Tom Bevan both weigh-in on Jackson's assertion.

Hugh just laughs: Speaking of toned-down rhetoric, the Boston Globe's always amusing Derrick Z. Jackson concludes this morning that "[t]he nation clearly reelected Bush last year because it trusted him more than his challenger at a time of war. But only a minority of Americans, according to polls, want a more conservative Supreme Court. If Bush listens to the people, he will have a chance to soften his legacy. If he does not, he will cement his legacy as the divider, not a unifier."

"Soften his legacy?" This means leaving a shorter list of reasons for the hard left to hate Bush for the next forty years, which upon reflection, isn't a great incentive given that the hard left is going to hate him anyway.

Tom Bevan's take at Real Clear Politics is a bit less gracious:

Constitutional scholars everywhere should thank Mr. Jackson for articulating a new standard heretofore undiscovered in the document: Presidents may only appoint justices they want so long as they are deemed "popular" or "successful" by political opponents interpreting the latest round of public opinion polls.

Nothing like a little snark to get your day going!