Speculation on the next SCOTUS pick. Is the Administration setting the table for an Estrada nomination?

Sepculation is rampant about the next pick. I figure I might as well give it a shot.
Here are some of the credible candidates
Michael McConnell
Michael Luttig
Emilio Garza
Janice R. Brown
Pricilla Owen
Edith Jones


I think none of these will be chosen, though all are good options.

I think the President will nominate Miguel Estrada.
He is young, 43, which is one of the most important factors
His resume is impeccable. Nominated to the DC Circuit by President Bush in 2001 and was fillibustered until he withdrew in 2003 before the Senate agreement of 14 approved most of the previously filibusterees. Estrada was filibustered for the precise reason that the White House had not provided access to documents prepared when he was assistant solicitor general. My interest comes in this point. Estrada and Roberts have almost identical resumes, experience and the most important thing, duplicate experience in the Solicitor General's office. If solicitor's general office documents are not released and democrats vote for Roberts, how can they vote against confirming Estrada?


http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/04/estrada.withdraws/

"Bush had called the Democrats' action a "disgrace" and vowed to fight until Estrada won approval. Estrada's Democratic critics said he had not answered questions about several key court cases, including some involving abortion and affirmative action.
They also objected to a decision by the White House not to provide access to documents Estrada prepared when he was assistant solicitor general. All seven living former solicitors general, including three who served under Democratic presidents, had opposed release of the internal work documents, calling them "highly privileged." "

Interestingly, several Democrats are talking about the very same documents today about John Roberts. The difference here, is that Roberts is almost guaranteed to be confirmed because of his stellar resume. Experts are expecting close to 70 votes for Roberts in confirmation.

http://nytimes.com/2005/09/08/politics/politicsspecial1/08confirm.html
"Signed by Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the senior Democrat on the judiciary panel, and the seven other committee Democrats, the letter said, "We are increasingly concerned about the inference raised by your continued refusal even to speak with us about accommodating our reasonable request for documents which are entirely within your control."
The Democrats said the documents were "all the more important to our performing a fair and complete evaluation of Judge Roberts" now that President Bush has nominated him to be the next chief justice after the death of William H. Rehnquist on Saturday.....But Mr. Specter, who has tried to play the role of neutral arbiter of the hearings, said he would not support the Democrats' request for legal memorandums relating to Judge Roberts's work on 16 cases in the four years he spent as principal deputy solicitor general under the first President Bush. The cases address what liberal advocacy groups say are some of the country's most significant legal issues, including civil rights, the right to privacy, the right to abortion and freedom of religion. "

My interest comes in this point. Estrada and Roberts have almost identical resumes, experience and the most important thing, duplicate experience in the Solicitor General's office. If documents are not released and democrats vote for Roberts, how can they vote against confirming Estrada?

Go Mr. President, nominate Miguel Estrada, a young, strong conservative hispanic, and watch the left literally, spontaneously combust.





Estrada Resume: http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/estradabio.htm
Born in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, Miguel A. Estrada immigrated to the United States with his family as a teenager. He is currently a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, where he is a member of the firm's Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group and the Business Crimes and Investigations Practice Group.
Mr. Estrada graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa with a bachelor’s degree from Columbia College, New York in 1983. He received a juris doctor degree magna cum laude in 1986 from Harvard Law School, where he was an editor of the Harvard Law Review. After law school, Mr. Estrada served as a law clerk to the Honorable Amalya L. Kearse of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and then clerked for the Honorable Anthony M. Kennedy of the U.S. Supreme Court.
From 1990 until 1992, Mr. Estrada served as Assistant U.S. Attorney and Deputy Chief of the Appellate Section, U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York. In 1992, he joined the United States Department of Justice as an Assistant to the Solicitor General. In those capacities, Mr. Estrada represented the government in numerous jury trials and in many appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Before joining the U.S. Attorney's Office, Mr. Estrada practiced law in New York with Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.


Roberts Resume: http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/robertsbio.htm
Mr. Roberts is the head of Hogan & Hartson’s Appellate Practice Group. He graduated from Harvard College, summa cum laude, in 1976, and received his law degree, magna cum laude, in 1979 from the Harvard Law School, where he was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review. Following graduation he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the following year for then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist.
Following his clerkship experience, Mr. Roberts served as Special Assistant to United States Attorney General William French Smith. In 1982 President Reagan appointed Mr. Roberts to the White House Staff as Associate Counsel to the President, a position in which he served until joining Hogan & Hartson in 1986. Mr. Roberts’ responsibilities as Associate Counsel to the President included counseling on the President’s constitutional powers and responsibilities, as well as other legal issues affecting the executive branch.
At Hogan & Hartson, Mr. Roberts developed a civil litigation practice, with an emphasis on appellate matters. He personally argued before the United States Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, participating in a wide variety of matters on behalf of corporate clients, trade associations, governments, and individuals.
Mr. Roberts left the firm in 1989 to accept appointment as Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, a position in which he served until returning to the firm in 1993. In that capacity he personally argued before the Supreme Court and the federal courts of appeals on behalf of the United States, and participated in formulating the litigation position of the government and determining when the government would appeal adverse decisions. Mr. Roberts had general substantive responsibility within the Office of the Solicitor General for cases arising from the Civil and Civil Rights Divisions of the Justice Department, as well as from a variety of independent agencies.
Mr. Roberts has presented oral arguments before the Supreme Court in more than thirty cases, covering the full range of the Court’s jurisdiction, including admiralty, antitrust, arbitration, environmental law, First Amendment, health care law, Indian law, bankruptcy, tax, regulation of financial institutions, administrative law, labor law, federal jurisdiction and procedure, interstate commerce, civil rights, and criminal law.
Mr. Roberts is a member of the American Law Institute and the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, and has also received the Edmund J. Randolph Award for outstanding service to the Department of Justice. He is a member of the Bars of the District of Columbia, the United States Supreme Court, and various federal Courts of Appeals.