U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 11, 2008 07:42 PM UTC
34 Comments
Because John Marshall has to be the top by any measure.
I have a lot of respect for Earl Warren because he managed a 9:0 vote on Brown vs Board of Education – that was an impossible accomplishment at that time. And with a 9:0 it meant there was no going back.
Oliver Wendall Holmes is another that I would put at the top. Little know fact about Holmes, he was an officer serving on the defenses where Lincoln came to view the Confederates and Lincoln was standing, exposed to incoming fire. Holmes told him “get down you fool.”
full list of justices here
Sandra Day O’Connor.
I have an abiding respect for Justices Breyer and Kennedy, for their thoughtful defences of judicial independence(in many joint appearances on the Hill and in documentaries).
Earl Warren — the list of breakthroughs during his tenure is awesome, I agree. Remember the apportionment cases, Baker, Reynolds and Westbury. The criminal procedure and free speech cases have made a world without which we’d be screwed. Warren had been Governor of California: Can you imagine that happening today? The last Justice to serve on the Court who had EVER been an elected official was Sansdra Day O’Connor, who had been a State Senator from Arizona. I recall Jeffrey Toobin stating a year ago on CNN that the Brown v. Board court had nine members with elective office in their backgrounds whereas the court which last year nullified the Louisville and Seattle school desegregation/attendance plans had no Justices with an elective background.
because I doubt anyone will take the guy I’m picking second.
First, I’ll agree w/ rsb in taking John Marshall…John Marshall Harlan that is. Everyone knows…or should know…his dissent in Plessy. That goes without saying. But he’s my favorite for opinions that most people would never dream of caring about.
His dissent in Hurtado set the stage for how we see the Bill of Rights. His dissent in Lochner screamed at us to look at state legislatures and how they write laws and when the Court should intervene.
The guy I assume none of you will take is my second favorite: Scalia. Yes, Antonin Scalia.
As someone who’s spent way too much time looking at congressional bill language, vote totals, and trends, one thing is clear to me. Congress has no idea what it’s doing when it’s crafting laws. Bills are a work of compromise and influence. Tradeoffs, tit-for-tat, and winks and nods make bills come into existence. Scalia ignores it all. I absolutely love the way he ignores legislative intent and history because, IMO, it’s giving the legislature a second chance to do a job it only gets to do once. You write a law, you’re done, then it’s up to the court. I find that refreshing.
I also like the fact that he’s so conservative that sometimes he ends up to the left of the left wing of the Court. It’s the basis of my undergrad thesis…politics isn’t just left and right, it’s a circle…or a strange 4-dimensional model that I can’t really explain on pols… 🙂
Finally, just read a Scalia opinion. Even if you completely disagree with it, it’s probably entertaining…
I saw a recent interview with Scallia. I walked away with a different view of him. I believe he does what he truly believes is right – although I disagree with his assessment almost all of the time. That to me is what the great experiment in democracy is about.
Thurgood Marshall is my obvious favorite, for obvious reasons. Clarence Thomas is the one I have the most issue with.
I know predictable.
That’s something people tell themselves all the time about Scalia but ime, it’s far from true.
http://steampoweredopinions.bl…
I once heard Scalia’s claim to know application of original intent to current constitutional questions as “Arrogance masquerading as humility.”
Scalia has never really explored the idea that a key element of “original intent” was the Founders’ understanding that the Constitution would be a flexible instrument that would be adaptable in a rapidly changing world.
His concept of a static Constitution trapped in the eighteenth century boneheadedly ignores how visionary the Founders were when it came to crafting a document that would last for centuries. His whole judicial theory is a non sequitur.
I once had the honor of meeting Justice Scalia thanks to the YMCA Youth and Government program. As an overconfident 18 year old I made the mistake of asking him a question about abortion. I have no idea what he replied, because my only memory of the event is giant flash of light consuming everything around me as he brutally and brilliantly obliterated me. After he finished, I mumbled some sort of thank you for so eloquently tearing my head off in front of all of my YMCA Y&G friends. Seriously, I’ve never been more impressively and utterly destroyed than by Scalia.
Justice Jackson was both a clear thinker and an elegant writer. The Younstown decision, his dissent to Korematsu, his service at the Nuremburg Trials. He was also a champion of the 1st Amendment (e.g., WV Bd of Ed v. Barnette). A great American.
John Marshall has to be #1, but I would pick Justice Jackson #2 for the same reasons.
Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!
A shining example of mediocrity working its way to the surface with the help of affirmative action.
The longest-serving Justice, one-time (brief) contender for the presidency and twice in the ring for the vice presidency, thrice divorced and thrice an impeachment target, including a Quixotic attempt by Gerald Ford who attacked Douglas for palling around with pornographers (blasting an article Douglas wrote about folk music, of all things, Ford actually testified, “The article itself is not pornographic, although it praises the lusty, lurid, and risquГ© along with the social protest of left-wing folk singers.”), Douglas was a champion of the First Amendment and the environment, even arguing trees should have standing to sue (same as ships, corporations and other legal “fictions.”) I don’t agree with every Douglas opinion or dissent (Douglas wrote more of each than any other Justice), but that’s not the question.
…she’s very smart, a great writer, and was a legendary lawyer to boot. Go Girl!
Also, Brennan was the star of the Warren Court in my view. So sayeth the Psalm.
Earl Warren.
Brown
Baker v. Carr
Griswold
The entire litany of criminal procedure cases
It was such a transformative court on so many issues, agree or disagree with the outcomes.
..there were frequent “Impeach Earl Warren” signs along the roads with the Burma Shave ones.
Also John Birch Society, although I don’t recall slogans or issues. Maybe it was “Impeach Earl Warren.”
Yes, he was a great justice.
…are you talkin’bout the Rehnquist court?
…because despite his conservative credentials, and his testified admiration of conservative Justice John Marshall Harlan II, he’s been a thoughtful and balanced force on the Supreme Court.
I know everyone was hooting and screeching about how he was supposedly a conservative home run when he was appointed, but he’s demonstrated over and over again he’s willing to consider each case on it constitutional, rather than ideological merits.
…Souter was a conservative home run. The opposite has been true for a while now; conservatives view him as a big mistake.
Simply for his dissent in Olmstead.
If so, congratulations RSB and good choice by Pols.
Didn’t RSB get the honor during the DNC, when he was posting from the blogger’s Big Tent? Glad to see he’s kept the privileges.
They never took away my front page rights after the DNC. Very kind of them to let me keep them.
Seriously, I feel like it was a year ago. Either way, keep up the good work.
And keep up the great posts.
I really appreciate all your kind words. I haven’t been in the game very long, but most of what I’ve learned has been from you guys.
Hey Mr. Toodles, did you ever get your voting status cleared up?
The Arapahoe County Clerk says I am good. When I logged in through their site to the SoS site I was in the database, but I also called and they said I am registered. Thanks for the concern.
John Marshall had a propensity for making up the law because it didn’t exist. Like a magician, he pulled the law out of his hat.
Thurgood Marshall, on the other hand, had to create equality out of inequality. He spent his life enduring death threats as he traveled around the south fighting for civil rights when saying the words civil rights could get one lynched. Then he argued Brown v. Board, the greatest and most courageous case of Supreme Court history, only to write opinions that made changes more significant than many wars are able to make. Lastly, when he was in the minority on the court, he stood steadfast. Reagan and Nixon appointees dominated the Court, but Marshall still pointed out opression throughout his career, even if he did it in remarkably prophetic dissents.
In short, unlike John Marshall, Thurgood Marhsall was a person who believed that the U.S. could be better than it had been. He believed that individual rights and civil rights trumped all else.
and I agree wholeheartedly. Thurgood Marshall was not only a great jurist, but a great American who saw our country, not as it was, but as it was meant to be.