Alito as Supreme Court Justice: Are you concerned?

Over-react much? Oh, wait, nevermind... you seem to do that continuously.

0 Replies

I'm concerned that he might expand presidential powers at the expense of Congressional oversight and individual rights. None of the other items on your list trouble me for two reasons: 1) Alito's opinions so far show a careful, technical and incremental approach to jurisprudence. He appears completely different from the wild-eyed radical the Democrats were attacking, so I suspect the Democrats were attacking a strawman for political convenience. 2) While I despise George Bush and his circle, I endorse the Republicans' choice of judges. So I'd like it if Alito turned out like a second Scalia. (Or like a second Thomas except for his rulings on executive power.)

0 Replies

Alito's previous medieval rulings about women concern me and as Thomas stated, his views on presidential powers are scary. I know freedom and human rights are something that must be fought for over and over again because the pendulum keeps swinging. Maybe future rulings of this court will awaken the young and passive generation of today and make them the revolutionaries of tomorrow.

0 Replies

Let me bring up some things I have wondered about.

The Supreme court makes rulings based on facts presented before it right? It's not as though they just throw out random rulings based on the whim of the day. So, why the concern over cases that most likely will not be brought before the court? Abortion? Why would another abortion case be brought before the supreme court? They have already mad a ruling on the subject.

Also, as far as Alito's appearance to lean towards expanded executive powers... Bush has 2 years left in office. Were Hitlery to make it to the White house (which I don't think she will, but suppose she does) wouldn't that be playing into the Dem's hands? Having a Supreme Court Judge willing to side with the executive branch? But, again, the case needs to come before the court... the FULL court, not just Alito...

That's why I believe the rhetoric is all overblown. The court has nine super-qualified people serving on it. That is all that is required. Alito will be a fine addition.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Let me bring up some things I have wondered about.

The Supreme court makes rulings based on facts presented before it right? It's not as though they just throw out random rulings based on the whim of the day. So, why the concern over cases that most likely will not be brought before the court? Abortion? Why would another abortion case be brought before the supreme court? They have already mad a ruling on the subject.

Also, as far as Alito's appearance to lean towards expanded executive powers... Bush has 2 years left in office. Were Hitlery to make it to the White house (which I don't think she will, but suppose she does) wouldn't that be playing into the Dem's hands? Having a Supreme Court Judge willing to side with the executive branch? But, again, the case needs to come before the court... the FULL court, not just Alito...

That's why I believe the rhetoric is all overblown. The court has nine super-qualified people serving on it. That is all that is required. Alito will be a fine addition.[/quote

Alito will side with the executive branch as long as it's part of or an extension of bushco. that is why he was hand picked. He's housebroken.

0 Replies

So what will he do the rest of his career as judge?

Also, wasn't EVERY judge handpicked?

0 Replies

Roberts and Alito are a good start, but untill we get rid of Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer there's still work to be done.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

I'm concerned that he might expand presidential powers at the expense of Congressional oversight and individual rights. None of the other items on your list trouble me for two reasons: 1) Alito's opinions so far show a careful, technical and incremental approach to jurisprudence. He appears completely different from the wild-eyed radical the Democrats were attacking, so I suspect the Democrats were attacking a strawman for political convenience. 2) While I despise George Bush and his circle, I endorse the Republicans' choice of judges. So I'd like it if Alito turned out like a second Scalia. (Or like a second Thomas except for his rulings on executive power.)

Thomas, although I don't agree with what you've said, and I truly hope Alito is neither a wild eyed radical nor in the mold of a Scalia, or Thomas, you've made your point well-- without foaming at the mouth over a touchy subject. I'm no fan of Scalia's as a justice, but there is no denying the man is sharp. I'm not quite convinced by Thomas's brain power.

0 Replies

Green Witch wrote:

Alito's previous medieval rulings about women concern me and as Thomas stated, his views on presidential powers are scary. I know freedom and human rights are something that must be fought for over and over again because the pendulum keeps swinging. Maybe future rulings of this court will awaken the young and passive generation of today and make them the revolutionaries of tomorrow.

That's hopeful, and true to a large degree. It always swings back no matter who is in control.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Also, as far as Alito's appearance to lean towards expanded executive powers... Bush has 2 years left in office. Were Hitlery to make it to the White house (which I don't think she will, but suppose she does) wouldn't that be playing into the Dem's hands? Having a Supreme Court Judge willing to side with the executive branch? But, again, the case needs to come before the court... the FULL court, not just Alito...

That's why I believe the rhetoric is all overblown. The court has nine super-qualified people serving on it. That is all that is required. Alito will be a fine addition.

Your example of "Hitlery" just drives home the point, does it not? You wouldn't want someone who supports expanded executive powers for a Democratic president, so you don't want it for this one either. It's a legitimate concern and I think the only part of the argument against him that is NOT overblown.

0 Replies

Green Witch, we have a revolution in this nation every 2 years; in the form of the national electoral cycle. Its worked for over 2 centuries. What dismays the Democrats is that the revolution cycle of late hasn't favored them. What the Democrats seem committed to failing to realize is that their electoral fortunes are entirely of their own making, and the only way to change those fortunes is to approach and engage The Center, which the Republicans currently own. Unless and until the Democrats realize and act on that, their prospects are bleak indeed.

0 Replies

The Republicans captured the center through disgust with the Dem. corruption in 94; but they have managed to turn themselves into the same thing they derided. The only way they hold the center nowadays is through fear; fear of terrorism, fear of immigrants, fear of gays.

That can only last so long, as you well know; your leaders' polling numbers reflect a great dissatisfaction by the 'center' with your party's rule. The question now is, will the Democrats take advantage of this? How will they do so?

I know that the Republican advice would be 'become more moderate' by which they basically mean 'become more republican.' I'm not sure this is a strategy of success. We'll see if the opposite works.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Let me bring up some things I have wondered about.

The Supreme court makes rulings based on facts presented before it right? It's not as though they just throw out random rulings based on the whim of the day. So, why the concern over cases that most likely will not be brought before the court? Abortion? Why would another abortion case be brought before the supreme court? They have already mad a ruling on the subject.

Also, as far as Alito's appearance to lean towards expanded executive powers... Bush has 2 years left in office. Were Hitlery to make it to the White house (which I don't think she will, but suppose she does) wouldn't that be playing into the Dem's hands? Having a Supreme Court Judge willing to side with the executive branch? But, again, the case needs to come before the court... the FULL court, not just Alito...

That's why I believe the rhetoric is all overblown. The court has nine super-qualified people serving on it. That is all that is required. Alito will be a fine addition.

Mcgentrix, you make a very good point that admisitrations will change to something less conservative at some point. I know, I know, we do not agree on this, but as far as I'm concerned Bush is going to attempt to forward as much of his Conservative agenda before he is out of office.

And, as a a lifetime appointment, Alito doesn't have to do diddly when a more Liberal administration enters the scene. I believe the concern is that Alito defers to Conservative power exclusively, after all, he sought employment in Reagan White House. Time will only tell.

The bright sides of supposed Conservative appointees:Blackmum, Souter, O'Connor...

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

Green Witch, we have a revolution in this nation every 2 years; in the form of the national electoral cycle. Its worked for over 2 centuries. What dismays the Democrats is that the revolution cycle of late hasn't favored them. What the Democrats seem committed to failing to realize is that their electoral fortunes are entirely of their own making, and the only way to change those fortunes is to approach and engage The Center, which the Republicans currently own. Unless and until the Democrats realize and act on that, their prospects are bleak indeed.

I don't know if I'd agree that they own the center. They used to, for sure. Independents typically vote Republican, but in the last election, I believe they won by getting out their base, not by winning over the center. Granted, my only evidence is as a member of said center and most definitely not owned by the Republicans.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

Green Witch, we have a revolution in this nation every 2 years; in the form of the national electoral cycle. Its worked for over 2 centuries. What dismays the Democrats is that the revolution cycle of late hasn't favored them. What the Democrats seem committed to failing to realize is that their electoral fortunes are entirely of their own making, and the only way to change those fortunes is to approach and engage The Center, which the Republicans currently own. Unless and until the Democrats realize and act on that, their prospects are bleak indeed.

There is no denying the Democrats have been blowing it for sometime. They are too desperate and disorganized at the moment, and that has, unfortunately caused them to lose on a number of important issues they used to dominate. For example, Labor issues. Yes, it is entirely there own making. I think the big blow hit me when Tom Daschl lost South Dakota, I knew it was straight to Hell in a handbasket after that. Kerry was a weakling, Dean a buffoon, Gore...etc., etc.

For the time being, anyway, things are bleak for the Democrats. But just as quickly their fortunes could change, when say, a Mark Warner hits the scene or a Barak Obama. I'd vote for Hillary, but think she's too extreme to win, we need a good to the center, a bit to the Left Democrat, someone whose got some brains, flash and is Teflon coated like Bush is-- Hopefully Justice Steven's whose 85(?) can hold out till then.

0 Replies

Steven's age gives me cause for optimism ... Bush the Greater very well may get to make another appointment to The Supremes.

0 Replies

Wouldn't that be something?

0 Replies

Alito worries me, mainly for the Unitary Executive crap... but also for civil rights. But let me make a more general statement.

It worries me when a judge is confirmed on a party line vote. It worries me when there is so much strong fear and division about an appointment that is supposed to justly and fairly represent the entire nation without regard to political stripe.

This is why I feel a filibuster is not only appropriate, but required.

The filibuster is the best way to have justices that are at least acceptable to the moderates on both sides of the contentious issues for which he will act as arbiter.

A system where the minority party has the ability to block a judge described by Sen. Frist as a "nightmare" for a segment of our society is a good thing. I would feel the same way if a liberal president selected a judge that was feared by a segment of the right.

But alas, what worries me most is that there is no opposition party in the United States.

When we were trying to stop the Iraq war... the Democrats largely rolled over after making a little meaningless noise. The Democrats look like they will do much of the same with Alito.

It scares me that the Democrats are little more than the moderate wing of the Republican party.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The Republicans captured the center through disgust with the Dem. corruption in 94; but they have managed to turn themselves into the same thing they derided. The only way they hold the center nowadays is through fear; fear of terrorism, fear of immigrants, fear of gays.

This is an important point. I don't believe people are voting out of trust, rather out of fear. This is obvious. And i don't mean your comments are simplistic, quite the contrary, you've worded it well. Rather, the vein of fear running through the country is at times warranted, but often times over-exploited.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

That can only last so long, as you well know; your leaders' polling numbers reflect a great dissatisfaction by the 'center' with your party's rule. The question now is, will the Democrats take advantage of this? How will they do so?

That's the $64,000 question. It's for the Democrats to seize the moment or to blow it entirely. The Democrats need one person, charismatic, telegenic, made of teflon, a strong platform, a good record of results. Is that asking too much?

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I know that the Republican advice would be 'become more moderate' by which they basically mean 'become more republican.' I'm not sure this is a strategy of success. We'll see if the opposite works.

Well, they're trying to appear more moderate. Especially in light of the scandals. Bush is under the microscope, more so than ever, which doesn't mean in the end he will fare poorly. But really, you can take Bush out of Crawford, but you can't take Crawford out of Bush.

0 Replies

Alito as Supreme Court Justice: Are you concerned?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know