Could Clinton be the next Supreme Court justice?

This Saturday on page A8 of the Washington Post, Secretary Clinton appeared on a list of “wild-card contenders” for next Supreme Court justice.

Over at Slate, Emily Bazelon writes that Clinton would “be a rock star of a Supreme Court justice,” adding “She’s served as secretary of state long enough to make a graceful exit” and “The only knock on Clinton is that at 62, she won’t necessarily serve for decades upon decades.” (Well, given women’s increasing life expectancies and Clinton’s excellent health — she bounced back swiftly from her broken elbow last summer — Clinton could easily go on for another three-plus decades.)

Of course, the big question is: What does Clinton want? Would quitting her secretary-of-state post before it’s even halfway through really be a “graceful exit”? And Clinton has made it quite clear she has other, private, interests for her post-SOS life: writing, possibly teaching, and definitely advocating for women and girls worldwide.

I’m not quite buying the “ambition for power” idea — expressed over at the Daily Beast in February — that “Given the Clintons ambition for power, most would agree that Hillary doesn’t see secretary of State as the final chapter in her career.”

The Clintons are ambitious — nothing wrong with that; ambitious people made America — but ambitious doesn’t necessarily mean power-hungry.  It means eager to make a positive difference in the world, as Bill Clinton has done with his charitable activities such as the Clinton Global Initiative and his work as U.N. envoy to Haiti (a $1-per-year job). Hillary Clinton could easily follow a similar path, working with her husband or advancing her own signature issue of women and girls.