Scalitovision 2006: A troubling nominee?
So says Jonathan Turley in USA Today:
Which might very well be more than enough for Democrats to oppose his nomination. To put it simply, Alito may be the wrong man at the wrong time.
**********
Good reads:
-- The Left Coaster: "Alito, Day Two: A Liar Or An Incompetent"
-- Crooks and Liars: "Democrats cannot meekly accept defeat on Alito"
-- Demagogue: "Where Alito's Explanation Doesn't Provide Cover"
-- Lean Left: "Alito and Teaching Donkeys to Sing"
-- The Heretik: "Forgettable Sam"
-- TAPPED: "More Fatalism"
The Carpetbagger Report is a great place to turn for commentary on the hearings and other matters Alito-related. Yesterday there were five posts, including "Bork made this easier" (see here): "The problem is how to fight a nominee -- possibly with a filibuster -- who's steering clear of Bork-like lunacy. Dems went into the hearings vowing to challenge the nomination based on Alito's responses to questions, as if to say, 'We'll look for the rope in his responses.' Surprise, surprise, Alito isn't playing along. Alito deserves to be defeated; I'm open to suggestions as to how to make that happen."
Plus, Kevin Drum asks a key question: "Subtle arguments about the nature of stare decisis and the precise extent of the president's Article II powers just aren't going to get very many people ready to take to the streets with pitchforks. So what's the battle cry?"
I'm also open to suggestions and would love to hear the battle cry.
But who will lead the charge?
Despite my agreement with Alito on many issues, I believe that he would be a dangerous addition to the court in already dangerous times for our constitutional system. Alito's cases reveal an almost reflexive vote in favor of government, a preference based not on some overriding principle but an overriding party.
In my years as an academic and a litigator, I have rarely seen the equal of Alito's bias in favor of the government. To put it bluntly, when it comes to reviewing government abuse, Samuel Alito is an empty robe.
Which might very well be more than enough for Democrats to oppose his nomination. To put it simply, Alito may be the wrong man at the wrong time.
**********
Good reads:
-- The Left Coaster: "Alito, Day Two: A Liar Or An Incompetent"
-- Crooks and Liars: "Democrats cannot meekly accept defeat on Alito"
-- Demagogue: "Where Alito's Explanation Doesn't Provide Cover"
-- Lean Left: "Alito and Teaching Donkeys to Sing"
-- The Heretik: "Forgettable Sam"
-- TAPPED: "More Fatalism"
The Carpetbagger Report is a great place to turn for commentary on the hearings and other matters Alito-related. Yesterday there were five posts, including "Bork made this easier" (see here): "The problem is how to fight a nominee -- possibly with a filibuster -- who's steering clear of Bork-like lunacy. Dems went into the hearings vowing to challenge the nomination based on Alito's responses to questions, as if to say, 'We'll look for the rope in his responses.' Surprise, surprise, Alito isn't playing along. Alito deserves to be defeated; I'm open to suggestions as to how to make that happen."
Plus, Kevin Drum asks a key question: "Subtle arguments about the nature of stare decisis and the precise extent of the president's Article II powers just aren't going to get very many people ready to take to the streets with pitchforks. So what's the battle cry?"
I'm also open to suggestions and would love to hear the battle cry.
But who will lead the charge?
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
8:23 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home