CIVIL LIBERTIES  
comments_image -

Alito: Clear and Ominous

With Alito's confirmation, Bush will succeed in replacing O'Connor's moderate vote with a sure vote for the right-wing's agenda.
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.

 
 
 
 

In a party-line vote that offered little suspense, the Senate Judiciary Committee recommended on Tuesday that the full Senate confirm Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. as the country's 110th Supreme Court justice.

Given that the committee's 10 Republicans had announced their support for Alito before the vote, and that a simple majority is needed to push a nomination through to the Senate floor, President Bush crowed on Monday that supporters "don't have to worry about [Alito] in the committee." The 10-8 vote took place after a one-week delay, allowed under Senate rules, which Democrats requested; Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., termed the stay "unjustified and desperate partisan obstructionism."

Committee members gave very different opinions Tuesday on Alito's qualifications. "Every member of this committee agrees that Judge Alito is one of the most well-qualified nominees ever nominated to serve on the Supreme Court," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. But Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., countered that Alito's opinions suggest he would push the court rightward and demonstrate a "well-formed philosophy of limited rights and restricted civil liberties."

Now that the committee has voted, Republicans plan to begin debating Alito's nomination on the Senate floor Wednesday and are hoping for a confirmation vote on Friday. They're anxious to seat Alito before President Bush's State of the Union address on Jan. 31, although Democrats could make that difficult with a long floor debate. With Alito's confirmation almost a given, however, Democrats are already turning most of their attention to charges of Republican corruption.

Several Democrats on the committee spoke out last week against the conservative 55-year-old Alito, who would succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate who has often been the court's swing vote. While Alito "responded to hundreds of questions [in his testimony], he adequately answered far too few of them," particularly those regarding the limits of a president's power, Ranking Member Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in a speech at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., in a speech to the Center for American Progress in Washington, called Alito's record "clear and ominous" and said the stakes for his confirmation "could not be higher."

But as Alito's nomination heads to the Senate floor, he is likely to win confirmation without a bruising filibuster fight. The committee's only woman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told "Face the Nation" last week that although she thinks Alito would most likely align himself with Justice Antonin Scalia, arguably the court's most conservative member, "that doesn't mean he shouldn't be on the court."

Alito is expected to fall short of Chief Justice John Roberts' 78-22 confirmation, but he is likely to receive support from just about all of the chamber's 55 Republicans. Most of the 44 Democrats are expected to oppose him, with the exception of Nebraska's Ben Nelson, who announced his support for Alito last week. Conservative groups are targeting Democrats such as Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Tim Johnson of South Dakota, both of whom backed Roberts and hail from states that Bush won easily in 2004.

Several other Democrats who supported Roberts, including Sen. Max Baucus of Montana and Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado, have announced that they will vote against Alito. Baucus said last week that Alito is "too far out politically of the mainstream of judicial thinking."

Democrats will likely use the upcoming Senate debate to build a public case against Alito on issues such as abortion, executive authority and affirmative action, which they were largely unable to do during his 18 hours of committee testimony. Kennedy complained last week that nomination hearings have become "stylized and choreographed appearances in which nominees are coached to say as little as possible."

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Fox, Breitbart, and Ricketts Try to Bring Back D'Souza's Pseudo-Birtherism

By Steve M | No More Mister Nice Blog

 
 
Activists Speak Out Against Lack of Access to Bradley Manning

By Agence France Presse

 
 
NYPD Catches Sexual Assailant, Then Lets Him Go Free Because He Didn't Feel Like Being Questioned

By Jill F | Feministe

 
 
Gov. Scott Orders Purging of Florida’s Voter Rolls - Just in Time For Prez Election

By Adele Stan | Washington Monthly

 
 
Abortion Clinics Across Country Put On Alert In Wake of Georgia Clinic Arson Cases

By Robin Marty | RH Reality Check

 
 
Former GOP Congresswoman Blasts New GOP Women’s Caucus: ‘They’re Not Voting In Best Interest Of All Women’

By Josh Israel | ThinkProgress

 
 
Debbie Wasserman Schulz is Wrong on Wisconsin

By LaFeminista | DailyKos

 
 
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 1 ]