Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Alito Nomination, page 1

posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 02:31 PM

link

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito today, which by the estimation of many, paves the way for his eventual confirmation. Obviously, Alito is not everyone's "cup of tea," however, the Republicans hold 55 seats in the Senate which is enough to confirm his nomination. Clarence Thomas was confirmed with the narrowest vote in history: 52-48.

sfgate.com
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court on a party-line vote today, setting up his likely confirmation by the full Senate later this week and moving President Bush closer to his goal of shifting the ideological balance of the high court to the right.

Half the 44 Democrats in the full Senate voted to confirm Bush's choice of John Roberts as chief justice last fall, but Democrats are all but unified in their opposition to Alito, a 55-year-old appellate court judge and former U.S. prosecutor from New Jersey.

Democrats on the Judiciary Committee conceded Alito's qualifications for the bench -- including 15 years on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, the longest previous judicial experience for any high court nominee in 70 years. But they said they opposed him out of concern that he might overturn abortion rights and yield too much power to the president in war time, a central issue given Bush's aggressive use of executive power in the war against terrorism.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

It is likely that the confirmation of Alito to the Supreme Court will shift the balance of the court for decades to come. I might find this disturbing if the Senate confirmation hearings of the last fifteen years or so had not made it perfectly clear that it is all well and good for a left-wing ideologue to be confirmed to the Supreme Court, but it is absolutely unacceptable for there to be a strict constructionist confirmed. The Supreme Court is not the place for ideologues of any sort and it is high time that the left's headlock on the American judiciary came to an end.

Related News Links:
www.miami.com
www.latimes.com
www.iht.com
news.monstersandcritics.com
Google News Search

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 2006/1/24 by GradyPhilpott]

marg6043

posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 04:50 PM

link

I agree with you, the supreme court should stick to what was set to do, to protect our constitutional rights and to abide by them in their rulings.

But we are humans after all and we never know what a personal agenda one person may have until is sitting in his supreme judge seat.

After all as humans we are bias to what we believe to be the right thing.

Even if that is not what others may think.

GradyPhilpott

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:02 PM

link

John Kerry's call for a filibuster on the Alito vote isn't gaining very much steam, even among those Senators on the judiciary committee who voted against his nomination. Nonetheless, he and the ever odious Ted Kennedy, continue their campaign to delay the vote. The Republicans need 60 votes to squelch a filibuster and most believe that they will have no problem closing the debate.

Senator John Kerry today continued his apparently futile attempt to block the confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. for the Supreme Court, saying that the vote on President Bush's nominee would be "a vote for history."

Mr. Kerry acknowledged that some of his Democratic colleagues had tried to dissuade him from trying to start a filibuster, a parliamentary debate-and-delay move that requires 60 votes to overturn. "I've heard disagreements: 'preserve your gunpowder for the future,' " he said, paraphrasing his fellow lawmakers' objections. "Well, what's the future?"

"God bless John Kerry," said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican on the Judiciary Committee. "He just cinched this whole nomination. With Senator Kerry, it is Christmas every day."

nytimes.com

[edit on 2006/1/27 by GradyPhilpott] extra DIV

EastCoastKid

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:13 PM

link

Yes. The Supreme court is no place for an idealogue.. like ALITO. HELLO? He is in favor of powers the president of the US was never granted. And SCREW you supposed war on terror. Believe it or not, the war on terror is a manufactured figment of whoesever imaginiation.

The president of the USA is not a king. Get that straight Bushfanz.

He's a figurehead.

He's doing his best to stack the court right. Exactly the way FDR tried to do (as a liberal Democrat). I am a REGISTERED REPUBLICAN, and I say NO to Alito. I am FOR civil rights as an American. This guy doesn't care so much for that. He's all into presidential power. The founding fathers made sure there were three avenues of power, ultimately.) It's kind of like kissing A or feeding at the trough, don't you think?

Alito will nod and wink anything Bush wants. Essentially, nominating Alito is kind of like providing DUHbya with a constant blowjob. What's really sad is, Clinton (who I can't stand) got impeached for that.

Go figure.

[edit on 1/27/06 by EastCoastKid]

WestPoint23

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:49 PM

link

Yes. The Supreme court is no place for an idealogue.. like ALITO. HELLO?

Yeah, but its ok when the democrats nominate a former ACLU employee for the Supreme Court, and guess what, the Republicans voted for her unanimously. Talk about double standards, you vote whether or not the judge has the qualifications to be a justice, not whether or not you like his ideas.

[edit on 27-1-2006 by WestPoint23]