News The Impact of Alito's Nomination on Individual Rights and Government Power

[faust9]

Bork of all people is putting his 2 cents in: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007424

I find it odd how the conservatives keep sloganeering "liberal courts" when 7 of 9 justices on the SC were appointed by conservative republican presidents. Odd don't you think?

 

[Informal Logic]

Bork of all people is putting his 2 cents in: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007424

I find it odd how the conservatives keep sloganeering "liberal courts" when 7 of 9 justices on the SC were appointed by conservative republican presidents. Odd don't you think?

I suppose the liberal court is why Bush won the 2000 election, why we have new eminent domain laws, bankruptcy laws, etc. The same goes for fundamentalists preaching how freedom of religion is being taken away. Repeating it makes it true (old and reliable brain washing technique).

 

[Astronuc]

Miers' Firm Received Large Windfall From Bush Campaign
'I've Never Seen That Kind of Money Spent on a Campaign Lawyer'

By FRANK BASS, AP

WASHINGTON (Oct. 21) - George W. Bush's rising political fortunes provided a windfall for Harriet Miers' law firm.

Campaign records show Bush's Texas gubernatorial campaigns paid Miers a total of $163,000 in legal fees, most of it for work done during the future president's 1998 re-election bid.

Some senators are planning to explore Miers' legal work for Bush during her confirmation process to be the newest Supreme Court justice, but the White House says it won't release any memos detailing that work.

"I think people across the country recognize the importance of attorney-client privilege," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

Reports filed with the Texas Ethics Commission show that two payments of $70,000 were made to Miers' Locke, Purnell, Rain and Harrell firm in Dallas within a month of each other during the 1998 campaign. Another $16,000 in payments were made between March and December 1999.

The 1998 totals dwarfed the $7,000 Bush paid Miers' firm during his first run for governor in 1994, and are extremely large for campaign legal work in Texas, an expert said.

Oh, Bring in the Money!

 

[Astronuc]

Schumer: Miers Lacks Votes to Be Confirmed

WASHINGTON - A Democrat on the Senate committee that will consider Harriet Miers' nomination said Sunday that President Bush's Supreme Court choice lacks the votes now to be confirmed, saying there are too many questions about her qualifications.

"If you held the vote today, she would not get a majority either in the Judiciary Committee or the floor," said Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-New York. On the 18-member GOP-controlled committee, "there are one or two who said they'd support her as of now."

But the committee's chairman, Republican Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania, rejected the notion that Miers' nomination was in trouble. Specter said most senators are waiting for the hearings before making up their minds "There are no votes one way or another," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051023/ap_on_go_su_co/miers_59;_ylt=AkeZ8R8URT2BWtd92PwVyihuCM0A;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

 

[Gokul43201]

I also heard that Miers' was one of the people that made a killing on the Rangers' sale...but I can't find anything (after 2 minutes with Google) to confirm or refute that.

 

[Skyhunter]

She isn't wooing these people:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/supreme_court/miers/index.html

I believe that this is the first time in history that a SC nominee has been asked to redo their answers on the http://www.jasoncoleman.com/MT/Content/MiersNomination/Miers-Senate-Questionaire.html

 

[rachmaninoff]

I believe that this is the first time in history that a SC nominee has been asked to redo their answers on the http://www.jasoncoleman.com/MT/Content/MiersNomination/Miers-Senate-Questionaire.html

What's the original source of those questionaire answers? If authentic, it's incredibly funny. Example:

I believe strongly in attorneys volunteering their time and giving back to their communities. While in private practice, I made the time to provide legal services pro bono, including work of a non-trial nature, such as contracts, family law, and wills. I pursued two such cases, one on behalf of a prisoner, and the other on behalf of a social security claimant, all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States, which denied certiorari.

 

[pattylou]

Hmmmm...

RedState is able to report this morning that, very quietly, certain third parties have begun going back through the list of potential judicial nominees at the behest of the White House.

http://www.redstate.org/story/2005/10/24/75037/326

 

[Gokul43201]

Miers is history

It's over now !

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1255208

Miers Withdraws Supreme Court Nomination

WASHINGTON Oct 27, 2005 — Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a Supreme Court justice Thursday in the face of stiff opposition and mounting criticism about her qualifications.

President Bush said he reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down. He blamed her withdrawal on calls in the Senate for the release of internal White House documents that the administration has insisted were protected by executive privilege.

 

[Manchot]

She's gone.

You know, now that this is over, I feel bad for her. Though she certainly wasn't qualified for the Supreme Court, she seemed like a nice person. I feel bad that she just endured one of the worst public humiliations ever.

 

[faust9]

Miers withdraws

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/27/p...&en=31b38b4fcab4d910&ei=5094&partner=homepage

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/27/miers.nominations/index.html

 

[Curious3141]

It seems whoever first used the term "minority" to refer to women flunked out of basic logic.
All minorities are discriminated against.
Women have been discriminated against.
Therefore, women are minorities.
That's an invalid syllogism. Maybe I'm being nitpicky, though. Technically speaking, I suppose a word can mean anything we say it means. Of course, it can get confusing when sometimes the word "minority" is used to refer to people who are actually part of a majority subpopulation.

I think "Yes, Minister" said it better than you or I could.

Sir Humphrey Appleby, in speaking to someone else about minorities, includes women as a minority group, then in an attempt to clarify, says : (Paraphrasing a lot)"Well, women aren't actually a minority group. But they share the paranoia that characterises all minority groups."

And that's a perfect reason.

 

[BobG]

The Miers' nomination withdrawal.

(This poster is so right for so many things in the world - FEMA, the coming weeks in the Bush Whitehouse, corporations declaring bankruptcy and dumping their pension plans...)

 

[Gokul43201]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

 

[Skyhunter]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

I would have guessed it was because the questionaire was just to difficult for her.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

I shudder to think about it.

Who else does he know that will cover for him?

 

[Echo 6 Sierra]

Gonzales probably. From the beginning I've thought that shrubbery was going to use her as the bait knowing that she would be rejected and then Gonzales as the switch which is what he wants in all actuality. Gonzales was the one that got his improprieties somewhat purged from public access when he was Guv and then gave him the Padilla Doctrine to use and the overall work-around for torture being acceptable because, after all, the Geneva Convention was "cute" but not conventional.

 

[Skyhunter]

Gonzales probably. From the beginning I've thought that shrubbery was going to use her as the bait knowing that she would be cast aside and then Gonzales as the switch which is what he wants in all actuality.

Could be Gonzales. He has been very close to Bush for a long time. Advocating torture may hurt his chances for confirmation, although he is very bright and articulate. That was enough for Roberts to be confirmed.

You give Shrub to much credit. Miers was his pick, and he was arrogant enough to believe that everyone would accept her on his say so.

 

[SOS2008]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

The documents would have shown how she helped with cover-up of all the scandals, that's why.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

The fundamentalists want an all-out war to overturn Roe v Wade. If the president pursues this course on behalf of this special interest, he will certainly go down as the greatest divider in our history.

 

[BobG]

The fundamentalists want an all-out war to overturn Roe v Wade. If the president pursues this course on behalf of this special interest, he will certainly go down as the greatest divider in our history.

The bigger problem for Bush is that the fundamentalists might not win. Bush can't afford to lose another nomination battle.

For the fundamentalist right, the philosophy is fight now, win or lose, because the line isn't holding. Their chances just get worse. The Gang of 14 compromise was a big blow to them. Frist defecting on stem cells hurt them. They need Bush to bring the fight now, before their position gets any weaker.

For Bush, it's got to be getting hard to bank on the fundamentalist right if it tanks his chances for succeeding at anything else. The idea that the entire Republican contingent of Senators will back him isn't quite so guaranteed (e.g. - the anti-torture amendment to the defense spending bill where only 9 Republican Senators held the line).

 

[Manchot]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

Seriously, what is Bush's problem? Can he take responsibility for anything?

 

[Art]

Seriously, what is Bush's problem? Can he take responsibility for anything?

I was actually pleasantly surprised to see Jeb Bush stand up and take responsibilty for the delay in distributing aid in Florida after H. Wilma

Bush Visits Florida as Brother Takes Blame for Slow Aid
Frustrated Residents Again Find Gas in Short Supply
By ERIK SCHELZIG, AP A day earlier, Gov. Jeb Bush took responsibility for frustrating relief delays in a state all too familiar with powerful storms. On Thursday, Bush again pleaded for patience and said supplies were shipped overnight to Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties.

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20051016090009990007&_mpc=news.10.1&cid=842

 

[Informal Logic]

I was actually pleasantly surprised to see Jeb Bush stand up and take responsibilty for the delay in distributing aid in Florida after H. Wilma
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20051016090009990007&_mpc=news.10.1&cid=842

I guess since there are no hurricane threads to post in... I agree, but on the other hand it is the federal government who dropped the ball, again. Jeb is just covering for his brother, again.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Just a short question:

Given that Bush's own experience in the USA consisted of lording over some failed businesses, what did you think he imagined 'enough experience' constituted when he ... with no experience at all, can override the decisions of the supreme court by issuing pardons?

 

[BobG]

I liked former Republican Senator and UN Ambassador John Danforth's comments about the religious right on CNN News Night:

... they want a political judge. They want a judicial activist.

This business about judicial conservatism and somebody who decides the law, that's baloney. I mean, that's what they should want. That -- that is what the judge should be, somebody who interprets the law and not makes it. But forget about that. I mean, these people are just as activist as the People For the American Way and all those organizations.

and Bush's attempts to sell Miers as an evangelical Christian to the religious right:

... they should not have done that. And, under our Constitution, there cannot be a religious test for holding public office. And, certainly, you can't have a -- a Supreme Court justice operating as -- as the -- the person representing a particular religious faith.

But the fact that the White House felt that it had to do that -- it shouldn't have done it, but the fact that it -- that it thought that it had to is very, very telling. Why would they think that? Again, it's -- it's an effort to try to placate, I would say pander, to one slice of the American political spectrum.

Hopefully, Danforth's other comment about the religious right and Bush hits home for Republicans:

... it's very obvious that nobody can do enough to please them. The president certainly can't. All this business about appealing to the political base, pandering to the political base, telling the political base that they're wonderful, doing one thing after another to -- to try to make the political base happy, look what it got the president. They gave him a kick in the teeth.

I think Frist could identify with that last comment.

 

[pattylou]

Thanks Bob.

I like republicans like you. :) That's meant in a nice way, not in a snippy way. My parents were kinda like you. Actually, you remind me that there is moderation in both parties, and how great it would be to find that again.

The religious right scared the cr*p out of me, and it is good to see them losing credibility. I hope it keeps up. I hope they become a non-entity in politics. I know, there will always be religious issues, but this attitude of entitlement that "We gave you the presidency, you owe us, you're our tool" is nuts.

 

[BobG]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

How about Maureen Mahoney. She's a female version of John Roberts. She'd go through the Senate with more than Roberts's 78 votes.

Or Bush could just give the religious right the brawl they want and nominate Janice Rogers Brown or Priscilla Owen. Except, if he had a weak nominee withdraw and then lost a brawl ...

 

[Human Being]

Whomever ultimately gets the SC seat... was going to get it all along. Everything happens for a reason in world politics, right? The global elite have unethical things to do, sovereign places to control, etc. Doesn't it seem to you that Miers was selected *precisely* so the WH issue would end up right where it has? The old-school term "cannon fodder" comes to mind. Perhaps with so many important world events transpiring, the SC is guaranteed to play a key role in the "future" of America? It strikes me as painfully obvious; the "team" now as a new "captain", and one more "free agent" is on the way. The USSC is yet another tool with which the global elite can "fleece" their "sheep". The Patriot Act, its sequel, or some other incarnation of its "principles" - eventually some legislation of that sort is going to appear before the SC...

Miers is a distraction, a patsy, a toy soldier - she was picked so that when "duty" called, she would withdraw. It has, and she has. In the whole scheme of events, Miers is but the closing "act" in the current "scene". Get your popcorn and soda, because the next "scene" is starting after a brief intermission.

 

[SOS2008]

I liked former Republican Senator and UN Ambassador John Danforth's comments about the religious right

by Danforth on CNN's NewsNight"
"...they want a political judge. They want a judicial activist.

This business about judicial conservatism and somebody who decides the law, that's baloney. I mean, that's what they should want."

This is what is disturbing -- The religious right wants an activist judge that will overturn Roe v Wade, and this has become very transparent to all.

Everything happens for a reason in world politics, right?

True that Bush, et al, have been a tight group with a well-scheduled and scripted strategy. However, I think this was a sincere screw up on their part. I don’t see any advantage to it, and if anything I think it has been damaging.

It has allowed people to see more clearly what Danforth said in the quote above. It has made the religious right look to be as unreasonable, unpatriotic, and even as ruthless as they really are. Now there is even less acceptability of a conservative judge with the credentials they would like (clear anti-abortion record).

Bush will need to find another Roberts--highly qualified with little paper trail, or a conservative judge on the DNC’s recommendation list. The religious right will gnash their teeth that there is no nuclear option—they’ve been waiting 20 years? Like a measly 20 years means anything in comparison to the health of our country over all and throughout time.

 

[Human Being]

Something I wrote at a different net haunt of mine...

Bush Picks Alito for Supreme Court - http://news.yahoo.com/s/...

G-Dub: "Judge Alito ... has more prior judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in more than 70 years"

Can you say, "shoe-in"? I wonder what this guy's deal is...
___

Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. - http://en.wikipedia.org/...

YALE. Shoulda known. Alito was put on the 3rd Circuit
Court of Appeals, in Philadelphia, by G-Dub's daddy...
Born April Fools Day, in '50. Is the golden joke on us?
Nominated on Halloween. Is he a trick or a treat? Heh.
Potentially the FIFTH Catholic on the Supreme Court...
creating the first majority-Catholic SCOTUS in history,
on PROTESTANT REFORMATION DAY! Should we laugh
or cry? YALE YALE YALE. It's all over the place lately...
___

{new text}

I think that Miers makes Alito "easier" to confirm. We'll see.
Incidentally, Alito might himself be but a means to an end;
Republicans are talking about the "nuclear option", and *if*
they in fact do change how filibusters work, we can safely
assume that effect was part of the plan all along. Hmmm...

 

[BobG]

Something I wrote at a different net haunt of mine...
Bush Picks Alito for Supreme Court - http://news.yahoo.com/s/...
G-Dub: "Judge Alito ... has more prior judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in more than 70 years"
Can you say, "shoe-in"? I wonder what this guy's deal is...
___
Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. - http://en.wikipedia.org/...
YALE. Shoulda known. Alito was put on the 3rd Circuit
Court of Appeals, in Philadelphia, by G-Dub's daddy...
Born April Fools Day, in '50. Is the golden joke on us?
Nominated on Halloween. Is he a trick or a treat? Heh.
Potentially the FIFTH Catholic on the Supreme Court...
creating the first majority-Catholic SCOTUS in history,
on PROTESTANT REFORMATION DAY! Should we laugh
or cry? YALE YALE YALE. It's all over the place lately...
___
{new text}
I think that Miers makes Alito "easier" to confirm. We'll see.
Incidentally, Alito might himself be but a means to an end;
Republicans are talking about the "nuclear option", and *if*
they in fact do change how filibusters work, we can safely
assume that effect was part of the plan all along. Hmmm...

I think the idea was to use the "nuclear option" early on the lower level judges to clear the way for Bush to nominate the 'ideal' religious right candidate without having to resort to the embarrassing tactics used in the Miers' nomination.

Turns out it doesn't matter. The religious right had enough clout to force Bush to go right ahead and fight both the filibuster battle and the nomination battle in one big war.

Alito is the best type of candidate the religious right could hope for under the current conditions. His rulings generally favor government over the individual. The key is which government Alito favors. Alito believes in states' rights over federal rights.

The bottom line is that Alito would be likley to defer abortion issues to the states and then consider any abortion laws passed by the individual states as having priority over individual rights. Of course, the drawback (for the religious right) is that Alito wouldn't be likely to overturn laws like Oregon's assisted suicide law either.

Aside from abortion/end-of-life, the impact will be the issues such as imminent domain (I don't think he'll put much emphasis on individual property rights), homeland security laws (individual liberties would come second to the nation's security), and civil rights (less concern with minorities, disabled, gender, etc). On the other hand, rulings giving the federal government less influence on local affairs would be a good thing.