Unlike with Harriet Miers, there won’t be a big debate about the qualifications of Samuel Alito, President Bush’s new nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court. Alito "has more prior judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in 70 years," Bush said Monday. But there will be a knock-down, drag-out fight about ideology. Alito’s views and rulings are so similar to those of conservative justice Antonin Scalia that his nickname among some attorneys is "Scalito." Thus, if he is confirmed, abortion rights would likely be overturned or significantly restricted. But I’m with Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., in believing that it is better to have a nominee whose views and records are clear — even if that means the confirmation process turns into a brawl — than to try to sneak through a stealth nominee.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Daniel on Open thread 11/22
27 Comments
Indeed. Let the games begin.
Judging by his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito thinks a woman is nothing more than an extension of her husband’s will. If this is the radical the Right wing ‘Christian’ Jihadists want to impose on the rest of us in America, fine by me. His record is repugnant to the majority of Americans, and no effort should be spared–including a filibuster.
But no more of this ‘he deserves up or down vote’ spin from the hypocritical ‘Christian’ Right. Juding by the way they sunk Harriet Miers, no one else should have to practice what they preach if they do not.
I have no idea who he is and I’m not rushing to judgement, but his qualifications and experience is extensive. That counts for something.
If Bush nominates anybody there must be something wrong.
First: Someone else has made the choice. And we don’t know who that somone might be.
We really don’t have a “president” just a “stand-in stooge,” who repeats whatever he’s told, and does whatever he’s told to do.
Now that we’ve all consumed the sacrificial lamb, the real intended appointee has gotten the nod.What is there about this one that we needed Harriet’s sacrifice bunt for?
Tracy
That Miers choice was to pacify Bush. Miers was his friend, so “they” let him make that choice, knowing it would go down.
Bush is dangerously stupid. Here is a good example of the seriousness he has allowed us to become exposed to.
Allowing Israel to keep murdering Palestinians has cost us dearly.
Notice America’s globe is broken first.
http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/2005/10/why-havent-we-seen-this.html
Abortion right “overturned”? Or returned to the states where they belong? Accuracy, please.
Let’s face it….people were gearing up to reject any nominee, regardless of views, qualifications, intelligence, etc. This blind hatred of anything Bush does is getting old.
I am not saying I support his decisions and everything he does, but c’mon people, rejecting every single thing he does is not going to get anything done. To exist to only criticize–no matter what– is rather narrow minded, don’t you think?
That’s BS Ray.When he nominated a good candidate for the court it went right through.Yes there are stupid people that just want to keep the doo-doo stirred up, but to generalize is rather narrow minded also.
Tracy–
Did you miss the vituperative comments that were aimed at Roberts on this blog? The regular contributors here couldn’t wait to post their barbs about him. Regardless of qualifications, if someone is nominated by Bush, the people on this blog are going to criticize.
I was making an observation, Tracy, based on observable facts.
OK we may agree on that.To some people it’s like this:My party’s nominee = GOOD.Your party’s nominee = BAD.No matter how I register (affiliate), I choose to weigh each nominee on their own merits.You’ve also hinted that you can no longer trust GW’s judgement. In that case I’m sure we can agree.I’m not a Bush fan, but I would like to think he’s trying to do the right thing, no matter how misguided he may be.
Rational thought..I love it! Bless you, Tracy! You are right.. I am losing faith in GW, and not happy about it. Even so, I get tired of so many people just bashing him without reason. Like blaming him for a hurricane, or the baseball team’s loss, etc. It seems quite ridiculous sometimes.
I agree he is beleaguered and quite possibly in over his head. At least he is trying. Maybe in a misguided way, and maybe the wrong way, but he is trying…
Thanks for your input, Tracy!!
In 2000, Alito ruled that the Family and Medical Leave Act (FLMA) was unconstitutional, denying that women are disadvantaged when they are denied maternity leave. The Supreme Court overturned his ruling in 2003, with Rehnquist writing the majority opinion.
Here’s the link:
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2005/10/family-values.html
There’s Right Wing ‘family values’ for you: force women to have babies, and then deny the leave time necessary for raising them.
Alito in a nutshell.
Ray
What’s getting old is having a moron in the Presidency. The United States is under the greatest threat it has ever been and this jerk is making things worse by the day. Three more year of him and I don’t see us having a country, never mind a Supreme Court.
This latest distraction is not addressing our most serious, existing threatening, problem.
Every single day America is dropping bombs killing Iraqi civilians, and it’s not being reported. Although this new distraction might come as some sort of relief to us here at home, our soldiers are still dying and the rage throughout the Arab world is boiling over.
Israel, for God’s sake, is firing artillery shells into the overcrowded refugee camps in Gaza, indiscriminately killing uncounted numbers of Palestinians. We have furnished the money, as usual, for this current slaughter and the Arab world, one billion strong, knows it.
If Bush would show some ” muscle ” and force a reasonable settlement to this crisis, that would solve the problem.
And, in all likelihood, our Supreme Court would still be there.
Nero fiddled while Rome burned
http://somethingstickythiswaycomes.blogspot.com/2005/09/nero-fiddled-while-rome-burned.html
CF, you either intentional misstated the 3d Circuit’s ruling in the FLMA case or you didn’t read the opinion. The opinion was based on an analysis of the state’s immunity under the 11th amendment. No were in the opinion does Alito say woman aren’t disadvantaged when they are denied maternity leave. It was a proportionality analysis. The Court simply stated there was not evidence in the legislative record to support the plaintiff’s, a man, argument.Herein lies the problem, kneejerk responses by people who don’t understand the issues do not advance the debate. The Supreme Court is not a Court of equity it is a Court of law. Just because FLMA may be well intentioned doesn’t mean the 11th amendment immunity should be damned. BTW, every other Circuit that addressed the issue ruled the same way Alito did.
Dear Phillip,
Here we have a man that has been confirmed by the full senate twice with 100 votes. Unanimous!
Now the character assignation and and attacks on his family begin. Now we will see which democratic senators are so cowered by their radical special interest groups that they will grab any excuse to vote against a man that is qualified in every way to be on the Supreme Court.
We will also see which so-called moderates on the republican side lack the backbone to stand up for principal.
Exactly, let the games begin! The liberals get ever smaller and smaller in the eyes of the people!
I despise Bush but I will give him credit for this nomination. The days of affirmative-blacktion are numbered, thank God!
Al Gore warned Americans of what kind of judges W. would appoint to the Supreme Court.
Now the American people are having their fingers pressed forcibly down upon the fiery braille of reality.
Enjoy it, suckers, you voted for him.
BTW, Clinton, who won with much bigger mandates that W., consulted with Republicans before he nominated judges to important judgeships.
Can anybody imagine W. doing that?
“I want to reach across the aisle,” he said during his campaign speeches, reach across the aisle and give Democrats the finger, apparently.
Galahad,
Do you think that Ginsburg is mainstream?
Al Gore, picked the Royals, to win te World Series.
Aaaaawww, misspelled “The.”
Unforgivable!
A black man once said to me:”I would rather have some one call me a no good useless Ni%%er. At least he is not hiding what he thinks. I hate those that smile and call me an Afro-American. When all the time I can see in their eyes they are thinking. No good, useless ni&&er.”.
If this guy is going to overturn RoeVWade. And there is no secret about it, I can deal with that.
It is when the attempt is to hide that intent and once again deceive me that I feel as if they think I am stupid.
Which explains to me what the group that gained power thinks of the American people.
As I said, this one I can deal with. The saving grace is that he has been around for sometime. He knows the law and what is exceptable to socality. The law governs the court, it is not the human desire.
Is there a problem with abortion rights being returned to the states, where they belong, in my opinion?This “sacred cow” so to speak has divided a nation long enough. But then, are you sure that is what Alito would do? There have been a few surprise selections to the Supreme Court who did other than what was thought of them.I doubt Alito will turn into another Clarence Thomas, but I also doubt he will allow himself to be “borked”.At least his background means he is a qualified candidate. Something Bush’s “friend” wasn’t.
Ian–
When you look at what a majority of Americans say they believe and how Ginsburg votes, yes.
You’re the odd man out. And I mean really odd . . .
Dahlia Lithwick of “Slate” summed up the problems with the Alito nomination:
Best of all for Bush’s base, Alito is the kind of “restrained” jurist who isn’t above striking down acts of Congress whenever they offend him. Bush noted this morning: “He has a deep understanding of the proper role of judges in our society. He understands that judges are to interpret the laws, not to impose their preferences or priorities on the people.”
Except, of course, that Alito doesn’t think Congress has the power to regulate machine-gun possession, or to broadly enforce the Family and Medical Leave Act, or to enact race or gender discrimination laws that might be effective in remedying race and gender discrimination, or to tackle monopolists. Alito thus neatly joins the ranks of right-wing activists in the battle to limit the power of Congress and diminish the efficacy of the judiciary. In that sense Bush has pulled off the perfect Halloween maneuver: He’s managed the trick of getting his sticky scandals off the front pages, and the treat of a right-wing activist dressed up as a constitutional minimalist.
But, I don’t think this trick will work . . . Day 2 . . .
If Roe vs. Wade is overturned, and abortion debate returns to states, can anyone give any ideas on the quilt of abortion laws going to be? And how about abortion seekers crossing state lines, would there be persecutions awaiting them upon return?