I don't know if Obama will actually pick her, but there is a lot of recent speculation that Obama may just pick her.
The first was delineated in this recent article by Above the Law, a prominent legal blog detailing that Diane Wood should be the pick and for the announcement to be made on Monday.
Diane Wood Speculation
They offer ten reasons why Diane Wood would be the pick. At first glance, she is seen as a prominent Judge but with a record on abortion that would be difficult in any year but especially difficult with healthcare just recently finished.
That said, they offer a defense that she may use on the issue by invoking her motherhood and her six children. How could a mother with six children be considered anything other than "pro-life"? Back to the reasons, the first goes into her qualifications, she has IMPECCABLE qualifications and even conservatives say she is WICKED SMART.
The next reason discussed goes into political considerations and how the WH should use the 59 seats they have in the Senate. Next, goes into her age and at 59, while she is old, her mom is in her 90s and she is really fit.
Another reason discussed is gender. This is the reason Wood and Kagan are the front runners. Why Judge Thomas and Judge Garland are not on the top of the list. Obama wants to nominate three women.
Judge Wood would also be a protestant replacing a protestant thus, maintaining the religious diversity on the court.
Next, the most intriguing reason would be motherhood. Obama would note that she is a mother with six children and give this nomination shortly after mother's day to tie the two together. That would get women to really pay attention to the nomination and insure turnout in Nov.
Rallying the base is the next reason. It is clear this would give liberals a shot in the arm to vote in the next election. The tea party is made up of economic discontent, there are some pro-choicers in that group. This may split them as well (a side benefit).
The two other reasons deal with sentimentality and symbolism:
So wouldn’t it make perfect sense to replace Justice Stevens with Judge Wood — a highly respected, Protestant, Chicago-based Seventh Circuit judge, who had once clerked on the Court herself? And emphasis on "herself," since Judge Wood is sort of like "Justice Stevens 2.0″: new and improved, with added gender diversity!
A Wood appointment would offer wonderful continuity, fantastic symbolism, and a great opportunity for President Obama to honor the legacy of Justice Stevens. The president’s nomination speech basically writes itself (with that intro keyed to Mother’s Day).
This article sort of encapsulated it for me. However three other data points to note:
First, unlike the other nominees, the meeting that Judge Wood had was NOT leaked by the WH (it was leaked by Wood associates). I'm not sure what that means but with the four different interviews, hers was the ONLY one not leaked. That appears to be intentional.
Secondly, Hatch met with President Obama today and really reamed him saying there shouldn't be a judicial activist on the bench. Now of course, Conservatives say that all of the time, but he specifically cited healthcare (hinting towards the abortion wars?). Hatch was suggesting that Obama pick someone who could get a "majority of the American people". In other words he was hinting for Judge Garland or Thomas. NOT WOOD. Hatch's statement after Obama meeting
"...A judicial activist would be a poor and unnecessarily divisive choice at any time. After the highly-contentious health care debate, I feel it is more important than ever that the President choose someone who will get overwhelming support from the American people and the United States Senate."
Finally, although unconfirmed, it was from a source I trust that suggested that Obama called the judiciary committee today and informed him of his upcoming decision. One of them (unsure if dem or republican) came away with the conclusion that he chose Wood already.
So here's the info. The question I'll leave to you.