Posted on 11/01/2005 5:59:22 AM PST by no dems
In 1991, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. voted to uphold a Pennsylvania statute that would have required at least some married women to notify their husbands before getting an abortion; a year later, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor cast a decisive fifth vote at the Supreme Court to strike it down.
In 2000, Alito ruled that a federal law requiring time off for family and medical emergencies could not be used to sue state employers for damages; three years later, O'Connor was part of a Supreme Court majority that said it could.
And last year, Alito upheld the death sentence of a convicted Pennsylvania murderer, ruling that his defense lawyers had performed up to the constitutionally required minimum standard. When the case reached the Supreme Court, O'Connor cast a fifth vote to reverse Alito.
The record is clear: On some of the most contentious issues that came before the high court, Alito has been to the right of the centrist swing voter he would replace. As a result, legal analysts across the spectrum saw the Alito appointment yesterday as a bid by President Bush to tilt the court, currently evenly divided between left and right, in a conservative direction.
O'Connor "has been a moderating voice on critical civil liberties issues ranging from race to religion to reproductive freedom," said Steven R. Shapiro, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "Judge Alito's nomination . . . therefore calls into question the court's delicate balance that Justice O'Connor has helped to shape and preserve."
"With this nomination, Bush is saying 'Bring it on!' " said John C. Yoo, a former Bush administration Justice Department official. "There is no effort to evade a clash with Senate Democrats. That's why conservatives are so happy."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Oh Happy Day, Oh Happy Day!!!
If the Rats don't get an activist like they want, they and the MSM is going to continue ranting and raving. Bring em on.
Somebody better get on Arlen Specters arse to get the process moving to confirm before the Senate recesses for Christmas.
I often find O'Connor's reasoning to be incoherent and inscrutable. The SCOTUS is not a "super legislature", although thats how leftists think of it.
But what about this?
"He has not flatly written that Roe v. Wade , the Supreme Court's 1973 abortion rights ruling, should be overturned -- as have some other conservatives who were thought to be on Bush's list for the court.
Alito struck down a New Jersey law that would have banned the procedure known by opponents as "partial-birth" abortion -- just as O'Connor did. His ruling, following the one O'Connor voted for, said the statute was unconstitutional because it did not include an exception for cases in which the woman's health was at risk."
Stephens is next. He's 85 and surely failing. Luttig can take his spot and then we'll have the great pentumvirate of Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Luttig. The greatest change since FDR.
We can dream! Alito's confirmation hearing will probably not take place till after the first of the year, unless the Admin really presses the Senate.
As a lower court judge he's obligated to follow the rulings of higher courts.
Now if RBG will just retire... and JRB takes her place.
> Alito Leans Right Where O'Connor Swung Left
The headline says it all, in full lib hypocrisy.
a. The libs are about to lose their imaginary
constitutionally-protected "swing" vote on the court, and
b. They admit that O'Connor was a lib vote, and not a
mythical coin flip "swing".
Oh happy day! I worked in a place where guys sang that song a lot. =]
Laura Ingraham said it all in a quick blurb just now. She said, "Every time the court veers left, the people are overwhelmingly opposed with the court's decision." That says it all. My new tagline for a bit:
This is a coded red alert by the Washington Post. This tips the scale. Their headline makes it clear that this isn't the loss of one judicial activist votes, but actually the loss of TWO judicial activist votes. This is a media flare.
Nah--Luttig is just another white male. Janice Rogers Brown is the way to go. It'll give the Democrats apoplexy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.