Alito Confirmed - 58-42

GotZoom

Senior Member
Apr 20, 2005
5,719
368
48
Cordova, TN
Suck it up Teddy.

----

Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. became the nation's 110th Supreme Court justice on Tuesday, confirmed with the most partisan victory in modern history after a fierce battle over the future direction of the high court.

The Senate voted 58-42 to confirm Alito _ a former federal appellate judge, U.S. attorney, and conservative lawyer for the Reagan administration from New Jersey _ as the replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has been a moderate swing vote on the court.

All but one of the Senate's majority Republicans voted for his confirmation, while all but four of the Democrats voted against Alito.

That is the smallest number of senators in the president's opposing party to support a Supreme Court justice in modern history. Chief Justice John Roberts got 22 Democratic votes last year, and Justice Clarence Thomas _ who was confirmed in 1991 on a 52-48 vote _ got 11 Democratic votes.

Alito watched the final vote from the White House's Roosevelt Room with his family. He was to be sworn in by Roberts at the Supreme Court in a private ceremony later in the day, in plenty of time for him to appear with President Bush at the State of the Union speech Tuesday evening.

Alito will be ceremonially sworn in a second time at a White House East Room appearance on Wednesday.

With the confirmation vote, O'Connor's resignation became official. She resigned in July but agreed to remain until her successor was confirmed. She was in Arizona Tuesday teaching a class at the University of Arizona law school.

Underscoring the rarity of a Supreme Court justice confirmation, senators answered the roll by standing one by one at their desks as their names were called, instead of voting and leaving the chamber. Alito and Roberts are the first two new members of the Supreme Court since 1994.

Alito is a longtime federal appeals judge, having been confirmed by the Senate by unanimous consent on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia on April 27, 1990. Before that, he worked as New Jersey's U.S. attorney and as a lawyer in the Justice Department for the conservative Reagan administration.

It was his Reagan-era work that caused the most controversy during his three-month candidacy for the high court.

Alito replaces O'Connor, the court's first female justice and a key moderate swing vote on issues like assisted suicide, campaign finance law, the death penalty, affirmative action and abortion.

Critics who mounted a fierce campaign against his nomination noted that while he worked in the solicitor general's office for President Reagan, he suggested that the Justice Department should try to chip away at abortion rights rather than mount an all-out assault. He also wrote in a 1985 job application for another Reagan administration post that he was proud of his work helping the government argue that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion."

Now, Alito says, he has great respect for Roe as a precedent but refused to commit to upholding it in the future. "I would approach the question with an open mind and I would listen to the arguments that were made," he told senators at his confirmation hearing earlier this month.

Democrats weren't convinced, with liberals even unsuccessfully trying to rally support to filibuster Alito on Monday. "The 1985 document amounted to Judge Alito's pledge of allegiance to a conservative radical Republican ideology," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said before the vote.

They also repeatedly questioned Alito at his five-day confirmation hearing after he would not discuss his opinions about abortion or other contentious topics. At one point, his wife, Martha-Ann, started crying and left the hearing room as her husband's supporters defended him from the Democratic questioning.


http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/31/D8FFOU2GI.html
 
CSM said:
i wonder who the Repub who voted against him was.
Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.

But, since he is facing re-election come this fall and Rhode Island is mostly Democratic.....
 
It was also good to see more democrats oppose the fillibuster stupidity. not going to save the party today, but at least we know there are a few coherent and intelligent lifeforms over there in la la land.

pres. bush has just secured his FIRST positive domestic political legacy. he's moved the supreme court in the right direction.
 
KarlMarx said:
Now let's hope that a case involving Roe vs. Wade comes before the court

Honestly, I think it will come up eventually but i dont think it will be immediately. I dont know why for some reason. I think it might be nicer if we could get rid of Ginsberg or Stevens before such a case comes up. If there is a more unified position then the people will accept it better.
 
Aren't there a couple partial-birth abortion cases moving their way up the courts? I would think this would come before the SCOTUS before Rv.W is overturned. Or maybe PBA could be used as a case to overturn Rv.W.
 
This is the primary reason why I believe it is important to support Bush and our Republican Senators. The SC today has so much power, and if we had a Dem president and/or Dem-controlled Senate, just think of what would happen down the pike.
 
What's very telling about this is that this vote forced the Democrats who are pandering to the left wing of their party to not only make assholes of themselves but to also expose their real agenda which is they want activists judges. Kennedy came right out on the senate floor and said Alito won't side in with the little guy. Astounding
 
Abbey Normal said:
I like your optimism, Bonnie. :salute:

Ill put it this way, this is the closest we as a country have come since Roe V Wade to undo some of the damage. Not expecting miracles too soon though ;)
 
Bonnie said:
Ill put it this way, this is the closest we as a country have come since Roe V Wade to undo some of the damage. Not expecting miracles too soon though ;)

I agree that our prospects are better than ever.

The miracle I'd most like to see is for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire before 2008. ;)
 
Abbey Normal said:
I agree that our prospects are better than ever.

The miracle I'd most like to see is for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire before 2008. ;)

Wouldn't that be magical?? :thup:
 
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110007901

The Livid Left
The Boston Globe notes that the Davos-Chappaquiddick filibuster effort was not good for the Democratic Party:

In the end yesterday they succeeded only in splitting the Democratic caucus. . . . By using a procedural move to try to block the nomination, which many Democrats opposed, Kerry and Kennedy showed that the party remained divided on how far to go to prevent Alito from joining the court. . . .

By splitting Senate Democrats on the eve of what had been expected to be a resounding vote against Alito, the filibuster prompted frustration among colleagues, said a Democratic aide, speaking on background.

''Some people are asking: 'Did Kerry do this in the best interests of the Democratic Party, or in the best interests of John Kerry?' " the aide said.

What the effort also did was set up, then dash, false hopes among the Angry Left, who are now as livid as we've ever seen them. From the National Organization of Women comes a relatively measured response:

Today's vote is the only Alito vote that really counts. Votes against Alito tomorrow are irrelevant, and no senator who voted "Yes" today [Monday] can hide behind a "No" vote tomorrow. Supporters of women's rights, civil rights and the separation of powers lost this pivotal battle because senators who should have been fighting for their constituents chose not to do so. But in the process we exposed the despicable agenda of the right wing, and their unrelenting determination to undermine our rights and liberties.

And from pro-abortion activist Kate Michelman:

Sixteen years after Roe [v. Wade], its author alerted supporters of this right that its position was tenuous, that a "chill wind" could be felt in the Supreme Court. Today, that chill wind has reached hurricane status.

"That chill wind has reached hurricane status"? Maybe you do have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

Over on the Daily Kos, they're much more, uh, animated. "Meteor Blades" writes:

Given what an atrocious job most of the Democrats on the committee did in querying Samuel Alito, particularly bad when it came to follow-up questions, and in framing the issues of concern raised by Alito's extensive judicial record, it is incumbent upon us to try to ensure that Democrats ask tough questions at these hearings [on surveillance of terrorists]. . . .

Many of us are, I know, psychologically exhausted from seeking victory that we knew since November would be a long shot. And I've seen a fat chunk of comments saying: what's the use, the right wing has won, there's no point in fighting anymore. Understandably. But a battle is not a war. And, disappointing as it was, and as devastating as Alito's tenure on the court may turn out to be, giving up is simply not an option.

But "Tranny" does seem to be giving up, more or less (quoting verbatim):

NOT A PENNY FOR THE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY, AND FURTHERMORE, I'LL NOT SACRIFICE ONE SECOND OF MY LIFE TO HELP THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY UNTIL THE TRAITORS ARE EXPELLED FROM OUR MIST.

Why? You ask.

Because they have committed an extremely egregious injury against this country's constitution and the people that it protects. I've lived my life under the belief that "An injury to one is an injury to all" When somebody harms my sisters and brothers, I take it VERY PERSONAL.

EXPEL THE TRAITORS FROM OUR PARTY, OR YOU GUYS ARE ON YOUR OWN!.

Meanwhile, the Washington Times reports that "liberal activists--among them graying leftovers from the Vietnam-era antiwar movement--plan to gather near the Capitol tonight, banging pots and pans to drown out President Bush's State of the Union address." The Angry Left seems determined to recast itself as the Noisy Left.
 

Forum List

Back
Top