Asked today about the timetable for a Supreme Court nomination, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said, "It's not going to happen this week."

Speculation has been rife about President Obama's choice to succeed retiring Associate Justice David Souter, who announced his decision last week. Much of the punditry has been focused on whether Obama will name a woman to the court. There is no shortage of suggested names, but we won't list them here because we are in the middle of running our "name the nominee and you can win a Nixon bumper sticker" contest. But many signs are pointing to its being a woman.

In the lead-up to its passage by Congress in 1919 and ratification by the states in 1920, proponents of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution carried signs and wore buttons that read, "Votes for Women." If a woman is named to replace Souter, she will be the third. Which brings us to the subject of "Votes Against Women" — the dissenting Senate votes against the two female justices who have served on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Sandra Day O'Connor (nominated by Reagan; confirmed by Senate 99-0 on 9/21/81).

Ruth Bader Ginsburg (nominated by Clinton; confirmed by Senate 96-3 on 8/3/93). Voting no: (3 Republicans) — Helms (NC), Nickles (OK), Smith (NH).

And while this may be a case of apples and oranges, there have been a total of two African-Americans nominated to the court in history, and both received far more negative votes. Thurgood Marshall, nominated by President Johnson in 1967, had 11 senators voting against him (and an additional 20 abstaining from voting altogether). Clarence Thomas, the choice of the first President Bush in 1991, barely squeaked by on a 52-48 vote.

Trivia: Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) is the only senator to vote against both Marshall and Thomas.

Tags: Approaching the Bench