Bush nominates Alito to Supreme Court

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 14, 2004
2,436
5,532
OBJECTIVE reality
Sounds like possible trouble, but then that's what we expected, right?

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush, stung by the rejection of his first choice, nominated longtime judge Samuel Alito Monday in a bid to reshape the Supreme Court and mollify his conservative allies. Democrats said that Alito may be "too radical for the American people."

"Judge Alito has served with distinction on that court for 15 years, and now has more prior judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in more than 70 years," Bush said, drawing an unspoken contrast to his first choice, Harriet Miers.

Unlike her nomination, which was derailed Thursday by Bush's conservative allies, Alito faces opposition from Democrats.

"The Senate needs to find out if the man replacing Miers is too radical for the American people," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada.
Link
 

pseudobrit

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2002
3,418
4
Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
I fear a filibuster will fail and he will be nominated. A few scenarios:

1. Democratic leaders will threaten a filibuster and be threatened with the nuclear option. They will compromise, leading to confirmation.

2. Democrats will filibuster and be subsequently nuked.

3. Democrats wil succeed with a filibuster and Bush will nominate Scooter Libby instead.

Prepare to see America totally undone. A severe tilt toward fascism is about to occur.

Goodbye, America.
 

tristan

macrumors 6502a
Jul 19, 2003
765
0
high-rise in beautiful bethesda
Alito-Roberts-Scalia-Thomas. That's a hell of a supreme court. Next time I see a 2000 Nader voter I'll be sure to thank him - with the back of my hand.

FYI CNN notes that Alito's rulings have chipped away at both freedom of abortion and freedom of religion, and that he tends to vote like Scalia so much that people call him Scalito.
 

SilentPanda

Moderator emeritus
Oct 8, 2002
9,808
28
The Bamboo Forest
I don't follow politics (at all really except for Jon Stewart which... isn't really politics ;)) but I'm just curious if there is somebody that everybody would agree on? It seems like somebody is going to not like the appointed. I don't think Miers was very qualified myself but... just curious if there is an "obvious candidate" out there.
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
SilentPanda said:
I don't follow politics (at all really except for Jon Stewart which... isn't really politics ;)) but I'm just curious if there is somebody that everybody would agree on? It seems like somebody is going to not like the appointed. I don't think Miers was very qualified myself but... just curious if there is an "obvious candidate" out there.
There's really no one that will satisfy everyone, however even Roberts managed to impress those opposed to him.

What would be nice is a candidate who could get at least 75 votes, perhaps as many as 90. That's not everyone, but it's more than the bare minimum.
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
from thinkprogress:
Samuel Alito’s America

ALITO WOULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE: In his dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito concurred with the majority in supporting the restrictive abortion-related measures passed by the Pennsylvania legislature in the late 1980’s. Alito went further, however, saying the majority was wrong to strike down a requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. The Supreme Court later rejected Alito’s view, voting to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1991]

ALITO WOULD ALLOW RACE-BASED DISCRIMINATION: Alito dissented from a decision in favor of a Marriott Hotel manager who said she had been discriminated against on the basis of race. The majority explained that Alito would have protected racist employers by “immuniz[ing] an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.” [Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 1997]

ALITO WOULD ALLOW DISABILITY-BASED DISCRIMINATION: In Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania, the majority said the standard for proving disability-based discrimination articulated in Alito’s dissent was so restrictive that “few if any…cases would survive summary judgment.” [Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania, 1991]

ALITO WOULD STRIKE DOWN THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) “guarantees most workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a loved one.” The 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding FMLA [Nevada v. Hibbs, 2003] essentially reversed a 2000 decision by Alito which found that Congress exceeded its power in passing the law. [Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, 2000]

ALITO SUPPORTS UNAUTHORIZED STRIP SEARCHES: In Doe v. Groody, Alito agued that police officers had not violated constitutional rights when they strip searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized only the search of a man and his home. [Doe v. Groody, 2004]

ALITO HOSTILE TOWARD IMMIGRANTS: In two cases involving the deportation of immigrants, the majority twice noted Alito’s disregard of settled law. In Dia v. Ashcroft, the majority opinion states that Alito’s dissent “guts the statutory standard” and “ignores our precedent.” In Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, the majority stated Alito’s opinion contradicted “well-recognized rules of statutory construction.” [Dia v. Ashcroft, 2003; Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, 2004]
there are some embedded links in there, i'm too lazy to recreate them.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
With this nomination, Bush has abandoned all pretense of running the country from the center of the ideological spectrum. He's openly appealing only to the true believers now, the one-third of the country who'd vote for a conservative Republican if he was a cyclops with tentacles and a prison record.

The Alito nomination will play against the backdrop of the 2006 election, so I don't think it's necessarily a done deal. One way or another, it's going to be a very nasty fight -- which is something else we didn't need right now. Privately, even some Republicans are saying the same thing. Another bad Bush move.
 

jelloshotsrule

macrumors G3
Feb 7, 2002
9,591
3
serendipity
tristan said:
Next time I see a 2000 Nader voter I'll be sure to thank him - with the back of my hand.
that's funny, i would think you should be smacking the bush voters... :rolleyes:

but anyways, i'm in bethesda now too, so you don't have to go too far to smack one of us.
 

tristan

macrumors 6502a
Jul 19, 2003
765
0
high-rise in beautiful bethesda
I was thinking more my uncle, but I will take any Nader supporter I can get my grubby hands on, give them a hard shake, and say "My God man, what have you done!" The implied message behind a Nader vote is that since Bush and Gore were both pretty bad you might as well vote your conscience. But how does Gore look now after five years of Bush? The supreme court would look a lot better, that's for sure. Gore's wife complaining about obscene lyrics seems almost quaint now.
 

Thanatoast

macrumors 65816
Dec 3, 2002
1,005
134
Denver
tristan said:
They're going to go toe to toe on Alito.
I sincerely hope so, but my faith in the Democrats' ability to stand up for what's right has been severely shaken in the last half-decade.

What's more, I like how this "strict interpreter, no-legislating-from-the-bench" judge ignored precedent and settled law when it didn't suit his needs, as mentioned above. So a not just a uber-con, but a hyporcritical one as well. (Seems to be a trend...)
 

Deepdale

macrumors 68000
May 4, 2005
1,965
0
New York
Thanatoast said:
I sincerely hope so, but my faith in the Democrats' ability to stand up for what's right has been severely shaken in the last half-decade.
I agree with your point about Democrats. They will make statements about drawing a line in the sand, growl, snort and blow smoke ... after all the histrionics have run their course, Alito will likely be confirmed and will feel comfortable being part of the majority. Then the gradual reshaping of American legal precedent will then begin in earnest. Sad but true.
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
for the record:
"He understands that judges are to interpret the laws, not to impose their preferences or priorities on the people," the president said.

Alito's politically conservative views were not in dispute. "Of course he's against abortion," his 90-year-old mother Rose told reporters at her home in Hamilton, N.J.
 

jelloshotsrule

macrumors G3
Feb 7, 2002
9,591
3
serendipity
tristan said:
I was thinking more my uncle, but I will take any Nader supporter I can get my grubby hands on, give them a hard shake, and say "My God man, what have you done!" The implied message behind a Nader vote is that since Bush and Gore were both pretty bad you might as well vote your conscience. But how does Gore look now after five years of Bush? The supreme court would look a lot better, that's for sure. Gore's wife complaining about obscene lyrics seems almost quaint now.
gore looks much better, but only because he's gotten a backbone again and started giving rousing speeches. do i realistically think we'd be in the same situation today if he were president? no. but i'm not going to continue voting for the least worst. eventually (i ****ing hope), the dems will realize their shift to the right is hurting them, and they'll grow a spine again. i also think bush's awfulness has invigorated many people (especially the youth), which may be a good thing in the long run


ahhhh, i had breakfast at the OPH on saturday, spent a bunch of time walking around that little area whilst waiting. nice area for sure
 

tristan

macrumors 6502a
Jul 19, 2003
765
0
high-rise in beautiful bethesda
Look at the price that's being paid though - two supreme court nominees, and we still have 39 Bush months to go. If Bush gets another supreme court appointment or god forbid two, it's all over. That's a heck of a price for the country to pay because a few percent of people didn't think Al Gore was too far right. These justices are all young and could be on the court 40 years. Maybe the Nader voters could have stayed with the Dems and just made their voice heard in the primary. Bush/Cheney would have been a footnote in history.

In a two party system, you have to vote for the least objectionable. If Alien is running against Predator, you vote for Predator. I think we're paying a hell of a price now and in the future because some people in 2000 left us high and dry.
 

miloblithe

macrumors 68020
Nov 14, 2003
2,076
28
Washington, DC
Rather than blame everything on Nader voters, why not blame Pat Buchanan for running such an innefective campaign? Or Libertarians for not getting their crap together and generating more votes? Or for that matter Gore for not being more appealing (to the left and right).

Focusing on Nader voters is a little blind to the whole complex equation.
 

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
leekohler said:
Bush is completely shameless! So much for being a uniter, not a divider! Get ready to become a theocracy people.
the way things are, we are still going to see him leave the white house in january of 2009 (i can't wait) and then maybe the born again christians can look up to the real god instead of the false god they have been worshipping in the white house for over five years

it's one thing to worship a god who lived 2000 years ago without sin and died for mankind, but quite another to worship one of the worst presidents in modern american history
 

jelloshotsrule

macrumors G3
Feb 7, 2002
9,591
3
serendipity
miloblithe said:
Rather than blame everything on Nader voters, why not blame Pat Buchanan for running such an innefective campaign? Or Libertarians for not getting their crap together and generating more votes? Or for that matter Gore for not being more appealing (to the left and right).

Focusing on Nader voters is a little blind to the whole complex equation.
seriously. it's pathetic to blame the other guy, just because your candidates suck. but that's the democrats' tactics. they couldn't even beat gw bush. twice. i mean, come on... have you seen this guy?

yeah, let's not talk about the fact that the dems failed to capitalize on thousands/millions of african american non voters. let's not talk about their ineffective campaigns and mixed messages. let's just blame the other guy. sounds like a bush move actually

oh, and sorry, but i don't plan on settling for a two-party system. glad to see you are happy with it though.


alito is scary. and as a friend said... "he just looks like... a normal guy". which is what is so frightening. what was it about the greatest trick the devil pulled...?
 

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
pseudobrit said:
3. Democrats wil succeed with a filibuster and Bush will nominate Scooter Libby instead.
actually, maybe bush should get one of the convicted criminals from the nixon or reagan administrations (watergate, iran contra) to nominate for supreme court in the event that alito does not make it

bush has really fashioned himself into a baby nixon, full of scandals and loyalty to bad staff while firing good staff

bush really has his "family" in order to do business