Scalitovision 2006: Kerry calls for filibuster
I liked him in 2004 and I like him now. Senator John Kerry is pushing for the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court to be filibustered. From CNN:
Democrats.com has much more on this developing story, including regular updates.
**********
I supported John Roberts (see here, for example), but I simply cannot support Alito. I suspect that Alito will ultimately be confirmed, but his elevation to America's highest court would be, in my view, a detriment to American constitutionalism, not least because his extreme views on executive power, more relevant than ever in the age of the neverending war on terror, would upset the delicate checks and balances that sustain American politics.
Simply put, the president wants to get away with everything, including pre-emptive military action, the unlimited detention of terror suspects, the torture of detainees, and warrantless domestic wiretapping, and Alito would let him. Whatever Alito's right-wing views on other hot-button issues like abortion and the separation of church and state, his views on executive power alone are simply unacceptable.
They are grounds for opposition and they are grounds, more pointedly, for a filibuster. (No, the Democrats don't have the numbers to block Alito outright, but a filibuster would at least force Republicans to deploy the so-called "nuclear option". They shouldn't be able to put someone like Alito on the Court without a fight.)
Yesterday, The New York Times wrote that Alito's "entire history suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the presidency and the limited role of Congress". And this: "A filibuster is a radical tool. It's easy to see why Democrats are frightened of it. But from our perspective, there are some things far more frightening. One of them is Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court."
I salute you, Senator Kerry, and I hope that your fellow Democratic senators join you. For what it's worth, there are certainly many of us in the blogosphere who stand with you.
**********
Others who agree:
Political Animal: "Senate Dems blew the Judiciary Committee hearings as a chance to educate the country about Alito's radical views on presidential power, and a filibuster fight would give them a second chance. They should take it."
Hullabaloo: "Kerry and Kennedy stepped up today. They aren't going down without a fight. This is worth doing and if we lose it, we should reward them and those who stood with them with our gratitude and support not another round of complaints about how they are a bunch of losers."
See also AMERICAblog, The Left Coaster, The Brad Blog, and The Mahablog. As always, The Moderate Voice offers a solid, detached perspective.
**********
MUST-READ: John Kerry posts at Daily Kos. Key passage: "I voted against Justice Roberts, I feel even more strongly about Judge Alito. Why? Rather than live up to the promise of 'equal justice under the law,' he's consistently made it harder for the most disadvantaged Americans to have their day in court. He routinely defers to excessive government power regardless of how extreme or egregious the government's actions are. And, to this date, his only statement on record regarding a woman's right to privacy is that she doesn't have one."
See also Senator Kennedy's statement here.
The Senate's top Republican decided Thursday to force a showdown on Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito early next week, with the two Democratic senators from Massachusetts pushing to block a vote.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist filed a motion to cut off debate on the Alito nomination after his Democratic counterpart, Minority Leader Harry Reid, objected to a move by GOP leaders to schedule a final vote on his confirmation Monday afternoon.
Frist's motion, which requires 60 votes under Senate rules, will come up for a vote at 4:30 p.m. Monday. If successful, senators will then vote on Alito's nomination at 11 a.m. Tuesday, with a simple majority of 51 votes needed for approval.
Frist's move came as Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts was lobbying his Democratic colleagues to filibuster the Alito nomination -- an uphill fight, given that none of the chamber's 55 Republicans have opposed his confirmation and three Democrats are on the record supporting it.
"Judge Alito's confirmation would be an ideological coup on the Supreme Court," Kerry said in a written statement.
"We can't afford to see the court's swing vote, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, replaced with a far-right ideologue like Samuel Alito."
Democrats.com has much more on this developing story, including regular updates.
**********
I supported John Roberts (see here, for example), but I simply cannot support Alito. I suspect that Alito will ultimately be confirmed, but his elevation to America's highest court would be, in my view, a detriment to American constitutionalism, not least because his extreme views on executive power, more relevant than ever in the age of the neverending war on terror, would upset the delicate checks and balances that sustain American politics.
Simply put, the president wants to get away with everything, including pre-emptive military action, the unlimited detention of terror suspects, the torture of detainees, and warrantless domestic wiretapping, and Alito would let him. Whatever Alito's right-wing views on other hot-button issues like abortion and the separation of church and state, his views on executive power alone are simply unacceptable.
They are grounds for opposition and they are grounds, more pointedly, for a filibuster. (No, the Democrats don't have the numbers to block Alito outright, but a filibuster would at least force Republicans to deploy the so-called "nuclear option". They shouldn't be able to put someone like Alito on the Court without a fight.)
Yesterday, The New York Times wrote that Alito's "entire history suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the presidency and the limited role of Congress". And this: "A filibuster is a radical tool. It's easy to see why Democrats are frightened of it. But from our perspective, there are some things far more frightening. One of them is Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court."
I salute you, Senator Kerry, and I hope that your fellow Democratic senators join you. For what it's worth, there are certainly many of us in the blogosphere who stand with you.
**********
Others who agree:
Political Animal: "Senate Dems blew the Judiciary Committee hearings as a chance to educate the country about Alito's radical views on presidential power, and a filibuster fight would give them a second chance. They should take it."
Hullabaloo: "Kerry and Kennedy stepped up today. They aren't going down without a fight. This is worth doing and if we lose it, we should reward them and those who stood with them with our gratitude and support not another round of complaints about how they are a bunch of losers."
See also AMERICAblog, The Left Coaster, The Brad Blog, and The Mahablog. As always, The Moderate Voice offers a solid, detached perspective.
**********
MUST-READ: John Kerry posts at Daily Kos. Key passage: "I voted against Justice Roberts, I feel even more strongly about Judge Alito. Why? Rather than live up to the promise of 'equal justice under the law,' he's consistently made it harder for the most disadvantaged Americans to have their day in court. He routinely defers to excessive government power regardless of how extreme or egregious the government's actions are. And, to this date, his only statement on record regarding a woman's right to privacy is that she doesn't have one."
See also Senator Kennedy's statement here.
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
12:18 AM
3 Comments:
Michael,
I don't necessarily disagree substantively about Alito. I am concerned about his positions on executive power. But I think the Democratic statements about him are equally extreme and, frankly, close to character assassination.
Although it's not in the press release, Kennedy apparently said that Alito was against equality, etc., implying that he is a racist. I think that's irresponsible. You can certainly say I disagree with him and will not vote for him without extreme statements like that. The same thing with Kerry--the implication is that this guy is a racist. I think you need more evidence than some opinions that you disagree with to say something like that. Especially since Kennedy and Kerry's views on what constitutes "equality" are almost certainly to the left of most Americans.
Again, this isn't defending Alito per se. I'm troubled by him and perhaps a filibuster is the right thing. But Alito is not Bork--whose demeanor alone would be enough to scare most people. He is clearly a decent, intelligent guy. I think a filibuster could really haunt the Democrats if Alito gets confirmed (which is probable) and DOES NOT turn out to be a right-wing extremist.
But generally, I think that Kennedy and Kerry, in making statements like this, seem to be pandering to the left wing of the party that wants, not just victory, but BLOOD. It doesn't have to be this way. Kennedy doesn't surprise me--he hasn't had an original thought in his life and he is just a tool of the left. But I had thought that Kerry had enough sense not to engage in character assassination. I guess not.
By
Anonymous, at 11:16 AM
Michael, on this one I don't agree with you, my position is based on several factors. I wrote about this a few days ago when I first got an email from Senator Kerry telling me that he was going to vote no.
My post
In that email, he mentions fighting the Alito nomination but does not clearly state anything about a filibuster, it could be said it is implied. To me waiting as he did does tend to support the impression that this is politically motivated rather than a decision based on conviction. Had he made this demand before or even on the 23rd as a part of his email campaign, I doubt the end results would have been different but at least it would have been before the discussion had a closure date.
I'll be honest though, I did not vote for John Kerry, not even in the primaries. Until the Dean scream hype fiasco, I would have supported Howard Dean, as I felt at the time he would have brought about real change. In the primaries I voted for John Edwards. That is of course OT but I wanted to freely admit I do have some bias when it comes to John Kerry.
I don't often agree with Kos, but he wrote an interesting post yesterday during the time period that Kerry was on Daily Kos.,
Kos
To me a filibuster is only justified if you actually have a chance of having an effect. Given the Republican numbers and the number of Democrats who do not feel Alito is filibuster worthy? It will be promoted as obstructionism and will be used against Democrats during a time when they need to get more Congressional seats.
So while I understand those who feel so strongly against Alito, I also feel that the winner in a failed filibuster would be the Republicans. To win seats the Democrats are going to need more than the left part of the group that supports a filibuster. They are going to need the moderate Democrats and Independents. Future Supreme Court seats will happen under the next President. If the Democrats do not find a way to reduce the Republican Majority or to increase more Independent candidates? If God forbid we end up with another Republican President who does not nominate moderate judges but conservatives? The whole court could become Alito's. That to me is a much larger goal to prevent than this one slot.
Then of course the additional issues I discussed on my own blog as far as what this will do to future nominations should the Democrats regain the Presidency. some doors are worth opening, even if you get thrown out. This one however? I believe would be better off left shut.
By
Unknown, at 11:32 AM
I am against Alito and support a filibuster. Jeffrey Rosen has written an excellent critique of Alito in the New Republic. He points out that Alito's position on executive power is potentially dangerous. It's here He makes a damning case without resorting to the race card, as Kennedy has regrettably done.
By
Jack Davis, at 4:26 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home