Politics is usually a game of numbers. But when it comes to the highest court in the land, the numbers often carry an asterisk. If you're looking for a quick tally on how many supreme court justices did obama appoint, the official answer is two.
Simple, right? Well, not exactly.
While Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are the names you'll see in history books, there is a third name—Merrick Garland—that haunts the halls of the Capitol like a ghost of a nomination past. To understand the Obama legacy on the bench, you've got to look at who sat down, who stood up, and who was told to wait in the hallway for nearly a year only to be sent home.
The Pioneers: Sotomayor and Kagan
When Barack Obama took office in 2009, he didn't just want to fill seats. He was looking for "empathy." That word got him into a lot of hot water with critics who thought it sounded too much like "judicial activism." Honestly, though, he just wanted people who understood how laws hit the pavement in the real world.
Sonia Sotomayor (2009)
The first opportunity arrived faster than most expected. Justice David Souter, a quiet New Hampshire Republican appointee who had become a reliable liberal vote, decided he’d had enough of Washington.
🔗 Read more: How Did Black Men Vote in 2024: What Really Happened at the Polls
Obama didn't mess around. He nominated Sonia Sotomayor, a judge from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. She wasn't just a lawyer; she was the "judge who saved baseball" (she ended the 1994-95 MLB strike). More importantly, she became the first Hispanic Justice in U.S. history.
The Senate confirmed her on August 6, 2009, with a 68-31 vote. It wasn't exactly a nail-biter, but the lines were already being drawn for the partisan battles to come.
Elena Kagan (2010)
A year later, the legendary John Paul Stevens retired. This was a massive hole to fill. Stevens was the leader of the court’s liberal wing and a master of the internal chess game that happens behind closed doors at 1 First Street.
Obama tapped Elena Kagan. She was his Solicitor General at the time, meaning she was basically the government's top lawyer. What’s wild about Kagan is that she had never been a judge before. She was a former Dean of Harvard Law School and a White House advisor under Clinton.
💡 You might also like: Great Barrington MA Tornado: What Really Happened That Memorial Day
Kagan was confirmed on August 5, 2010, by a 63-37 vote. With her seat secured, the Court had three women serving simultaneously for the first time ever: Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
The Garland Standoff: When Two Didn’t Become Three
If we’re being technical about how many supreme court justices did obama appoint, the count stops at two. But if we’re talking about nominations, the number is three.
February 13, 2016, changed everything. Justice Antonin Scalia, the intellectual engine of the conservative wing, passed away unexpectedly. It was an election year.
Obama nominated Merrick Garland, a widely respected, moderate-leaning judge. Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, basically said "No thanks." They argued that since it was an election year, the "people should have a voice" in choosing the next justice.
📖 Related: Election Where to Watch: How to Find Real-Time Results Without the Chaos
Garland’s nomination sat in limbo for 293 days.
No hearing.
No vote.
Nothing.
It was the longest-lasting Supreme Court nomination to ever expire. When Donald Trump won the 2016 election, the vacancy was eventually filled by Neil Gorsuch.
Why These Appointments Changed the Vibe
People often think that because Obama replaced liberal-leaning justices (Souter and Stevens) with other liberals, nothing really changed. That's a bit of a misconception.
- Demographics: He fundamentally shifted the look of the court. Before Obama, the bench was almost entirely white and male. Sotomayor and Kagan brought perspectives that simply weren't there before.
- The "Empathy" Factor: His appointees often focus on the procedural hurdles that average people face. Whether it’s Sotomayor’s fierce dissents on policing or Kagan’s sharp, conversational writing style, they changed how the court communicates with the public.
- The Lost Majority: If Garland had been confirmed, the Court would have had a 5-4 liberal majority for the first time in decades. Because he wasn't, the court eventually shifted into the 6-3 conservative supermajority we see today.
What You Should Do Next
Knowing the numbers is one thing, but seeing how these justices actually rule is another. If you want to dive deeper into the legacy of the Obama appointees, here is what you can do right now:
- Read a Sotomayor Dissent: She is often called the "People's Justice." Look up her dissent in Utah v. Strieff. It’s not just legal jargon; it’s a powerful essay on civil rights.
- Listen to Oral Arguments: You can go to Oyez.org and listen to Justice Kagan question lawyers. She is famously sharp and uses great analogies that make complex law feel like a normal conversation.
- Track the Trends: Look at how many 6-3 decisions are coming out of the current court. It helps put the "Garland Gaps" into perspective and shows why those 2016 numbers mattered so much.
Basically, Obama got two people on the bench who will likely be there for another twenty years. But the one he didn't get might be the most influential part of his judicial story.