Supreme Court Choice To Show Real Ideology of Obama

President Barack Obama's critics have labeled him as the most liberal president in a half-century, but some have labeled him as a centrist because of the way he has governed since he was sworn in a little more than 100 days ago.

But the true sense of where Obama stands — left-center or center-right — will be exemplified in the person he chooses to replace Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The highest court in the land has often been called nonpartisan and free of politics. But if you believe that, you're nuts.

The selection of a Supreme Court nominee is rife with political intrigue, as the president has to navigate the treacherous waters of the U.S. Senate, where his nominee will be confirmed, and the myriad public interest groups looking to make sure their voices are heard in the process.

Remember when Harriet Miers was tapped by President George W. Bush to join the court? Many right-wingers pounced, saying she wasn't sufficiently conservative to join the court — even though a conservative president vouched for her — and her appointment was rescinded.

Liberals went nuts when President Ronald Reagan put up Judge Robert Bork for consideration in 1987, and after contentious Senate hearings, he was denied a seat on the court.

Even though Democrats hold a substantial majority in the U.S. Senate, Obama understands that whomever he appoints will be scrutinized heavily. Conservatives are waiting to see whether he will veer hard to the left, and liberals are praying desperately that he does go in that direction.

All this will require the former constitutional law professor to find a candidate who best exemplifies the temperament he believes is necessary for one to have to serve the nation as one of nine on the most powerful legal bench in the nation.

His past statements give us some insight into his thinking. For instance, at the forum hosted last year by Pastor Rick Warren, Obama made it clear that he never will appoint a justice in the mold of Justice Clarence Thomas. "I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. … I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the Constitution," Obama said.

In a May 8, 2008, interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Obama made it clear that he likes the justices with liberal bents:

"Justice Breyer (and) Justice Ginsburg are very sensible judges. I think that Justice Souter, who was a Republican appointee, is a sensible judge.

"What you're looking for is somebody who's going to apply the law where it's clear.

Now, there's going to be those 5 percent of cases or 1 percent of cases where the law isn't clear, and the judge then has to bring in his or her own perspectives, his ethics, his or her moral bearings, and in those circumstances, what I do want is a judge who is sympathetic enough to those who are on the outside, those who are vulnerable, those who are powerless, those who can't have access to political power and, as a consequence, can't protect themselves from being dealt with sometimes unfairly.

"The court's become a refuge for justice. That's been its historic role. That was its role in Brown v. Board of Education. I think a judge who is unsympathetic to the fact that in some cases, we've got to make sure that civil rights are protected, that we've got to make sure that civil liberties are protected — because oftentimes there are pressures that are placed on politicians to want to set civil liberties aside, especially in time(s) when we've had terrorist attacks — making sure that we maintain our separation of powers so that we don't have a president who is taking over more and more power. I think those are all criteria by which I can judge whether or not this is a good appointee."

In his remarks about Souter's retirement, Obama laid out his vision for the appointment:

"I will seek somebody with a sharp and independent mind and a record of excellence and integrity. I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook. It is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives — whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation.

"I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes. I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role. I will seek somebody who shares my respect for constitutional values on which this nation was founded and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time."

Even with all of Obama's careful planning, the jurist could go in his or her own direction. President Dwight Eisenhower often said that the worst decision he made was putting Earl Warren on the Supreme Court. (Warren led the effort to pass the Brown v. Board of Education decision.) And conservatives are still howling at Souter, who they thought would help to overturn Roe v. Wade, for evolving into more of a liberal.

President Obama has a tough choice to make, and the selection will be a major part of his legacy.

Roland S. Martin is an award-winning CNN contributor and the author of "Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith." Please visit his Web site at www.RolandSMartin.com. To find out more about Roland S. Martin and read his past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.