If U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens announces his "widely anticipated" retirement, Democrats close to President Obama say he likely would nominate one of three contenders -- Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood or D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland, the New York Times reports. A confirmation battle to replace Stevens -- considered the leader of the Court's liberal wing -- "could not only provoke fresh skirmishing" on abortion rights and other perennially contentious issues, it also likely would fuel debate over Republican claims related to the constitutionality of health reform, according to the Times.

Stevens, who will turn 90 next month, told the New Yorker in early March that he would make a retirement decision within the next month. While the White House has not publicly stated that it is vetting potential nominees, last year's confirmation of Justice Sonia Sotomayor has left the White House "with long dossiers on a host of candidates," the Times reports.

Obama personally interviewed Kagan, Wood and Garland before selecting Sotomayor to fill retired Justice David Souter's seat. Of the three, Wood is the "front-runner with the most support among liberals," in part because of her opposition to some abortion restrictions and her reputation for taking a firm stand against conservative judges on the Seventh Circuit, according to the Times. Kagan, dean of Harvard Law School, has no judicial record, though she has both hired conservative professors and taken liberal stances during her tenure at Harvard. Garland "might be the safest choice" of the three because he is well-regarded by Democrats and some top Republicans, but "his careful jurisprudence stirs less enthusiasm among liberal activists" than other contenders, the Times reports.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano also was interviewed by Obama last year, but various issues during her tenure in the administration could prevent her selection, the Times reports. Obama also may select a candidate outside of the "typical pool of appellate judges," such as Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D), Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D), Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) or Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.).

Thomas Goldstein, a Supreme Court litigator and founder of the widely read SCOTUSblog, said that Obama could select whoever he wants with "no diversity imperative" because he previously chose Sotomayor, the first Latina justice. "But that doesn't mean there aren't diversity advantages," he noted, adding, "Appointing two women in a row I think they would view as a plus."

According to the Times, the "president's base hopes he will name a full-throated champion to counter Justice Antonin Scalia, the most forceful conservative on the bench." Ultimately, the administration's choice will "depend on what kind of fight Mr. Obama is willing to wage amid other tough legislative battles," the Times notes (Baker, New York Times, 3/26).

Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.