Souter's Pen

I guess it's not totally irrelevant that Chris posted about Souter, given the discussion of the ABA ratings and the new vacancy on the Supreme Court he just created...though the pen thing would not, I think, be predictive of either decision making or nomination...  Anyway, I wanted to take the opportunity the pen post created both to thank Amy and Rich for spending some time with us discussing their research, and to think about the ramifications of that research for some of the names being batted around for Souter's seat.  I think we all agree that the pick will be a female, which means, according to Rich and Amy's research, a lower expected ABA rating.  In addition, the pick may well be a non-judge (Jennifer Granholm, anyone?), which would also lead to a lower ABA rating.  However, the pick is being made by a Democrat...So, Rich and Amy, what does your research say about the rating a Granholm might receive?  Does ideology trump judicial experience?  [Perhaps tangentially, will the President letting the ABA back in on the process make their determination more relevant to the Senate?  Does the Senate distinguish between WQ and Q?  Or does it just not vote for someone who is not qualified?]