Did anyone really think that they would proceed w/hearings on Alito when the Thanksgiving holidays followed shortly by the Christmas and New Year's holidays were on the immediate horizon? Now, frankly, would you give up your vacation periods to do hearings? I think not. Remember, a lot of these Senators have to travel great distances back and forth to their states, plus they use a lot of their vacation time for politicking back in the home state, and fund raising. Just occasionally, I think there shouldn't be such a gut reaction to not getting what we want when we want it. Alito has a long track record and it's going to take both sides some time to plow through it all. I'm not hearing any Pub Senators squawking about this date for hearings on TV so far.
It would have been preferable from our political viewpoint to have them sooner, so that O'Connor won't be sitting on the SC for too long, but I doubt any key cases will be actually decided before January anyhow. Someone correct me if this is wrong. One of you lawyer types out there, please answer this question if you can: When Alito assumes his seat on the Supreme Court in January (assuming he is approved, which he will be), on cases that came before the court prior to his arrival (from the beginning of the term until mid-January), will O'Connor be able to vote on them, or is it voted on w/out her having a vote, but neither will Alito have a vote, or will Alito have a vote? I would assume that once O'Connor is gone, she no longer has a vote, and any case during the interim period would be voted on by 8 justices, rather than 9. What's the straight poop on this? Anyone know?
Sorry, but I have zero sympathy. They live the lives of pampered Dukes. If they were businesslike about it, they could be done before Thanksgiving, let alone Christmas.
And I don't grant that they have to comb over every case. Wasn't that long ago that SC nominees didn't even deign to come ot hearings. There is no Constitutional requirement that this carnival be held.
And yes, there are important issues before the Court that frankly I don't want O'Connor voting on. Either a parental notification or an "assisted suicide" case, as I recall -- or both.
Dan
There are two abortion case, and a queer marriage case coming up that O'Conner will now be voting on and will certainly be the "swing" vote for, but Miers would probably have been doing the voting if she hadn't been forced to "withdraw"
"Now, frankly, would you give up your vacation periods to do hearings?"
I've stood watch on Christmas Day more than once.
A person who wouldn't give up a few days of his vacation for something this important should be expelled from the senate and stripped of his citizenship.