Ernest Canning: At the bare minimum, the president would do well to impose the Sanders litmus test. After all, 80% of the American people agree with Bernie Sanders’s insistence that the disastrous Citizens United decision be overturned. The president is faced with a generational choice. He should seek a legal giant. Next Thurgood Marshall
Lawrence Rosenthal: The Tea Party’s feeling that something theirs was being taken away and given to others was precisely the feeling that Robert Bork was translating into a judicial philosophy.
Stanley Kutler: Bork inevitably opposed judicial decisions favoring contemporary values and desires, readily attacking judges who found ample constitutional support for ruling on behalf of second-class citizens, whether they wanted to eat at any lunch counter or get an abortion.
David Love: It is hard to imagine how Romney will clear a path to victory in November by associating with an ideologically extreme radical such as Robert Bork.
Andy Love: Imagine if Bork hadn’t been Borked. There he would sit with the other radicals on the Court — Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito,
Robert Illes: But if Anita Hill’s warnings were not heeded in 1991, in 2011 they seem to have gained some heft. Is Clarence Thomas not just partisan but also dirty – and not in the pubic-hair-on-the-coke-can sense.
Stanley Kutler: Thomas sometimes seems more comfortable with the Articles of Confederation, the failed authorization for a national government that had preceded the adoption of the Constitution in 1787. If conservatives are said to look backward, then Thomas clearly owns the longest view.
Tracy Emblem: Speaking of judicial activism – both United States Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia are members of a Federalist Society – an organization that advocates a roll back of civil rights.