Let the Dems defeat Alito

I agree with Joseph.

 

That would be judicial activism, and I'd be against it. However, if they decided to overturn abortion laws based on constitutional arguments, then I'd favor it. Either way, I don't get a say in the decision, so whether I'm for or against it is immaterial.

 

I don't have a problem with diversity as a nice-to-have but that should not be the deciding factor on who is chosen. There are plenty of excellent candidates of various races and who are women so I have no problem with taking an extra look there.

 

Again, how do you know this? Please point me to any statement during the hearings that leads you to believe that Alito is going to work to repeal Roe v. Wade?

Regards,
BiR

 

It is really quite simple; Judge Bork answered questions and got Borked. Ginsburg. didn't answer questions and got approved.

No nominee since Ginsburg has answered a question that implies how they might rule on an issue; and they should not.

 

Excellent point, OR. How can a person objectively know how they might rule if they don't know the legal merits of the case? One cannot know the legal merits of a case until that case is presented, and not a moment before.

When I was in college, I worked for a law firm. Does it show??

 

Ah, yes: the much-maligned Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I recall that Orrin Hatch is the person who offered her to then-President Clinton as a choice for the Court. The more I see written about her, I am truly beginning to like her.

Could you point me to the text of those questions that were not answered? I would really like to see that to which you are referring. I remember either Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity making this same point, but he (whichever it was that made the point) really didn't offer any evidence to support their contention.

Any assistance you could offer would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
BiR

 

Yeah, but what exactly does Alito bring to the table? As I pointed out in another forum, I have some serious reservations about this candidate. He is not the man for this job.

Yet many of the people I see supporting him seem to be under the impression that he will work to repeal Roe v. Wade, despite no real evidence to support such a claim. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have grossly misrepresented this entire process, claiming that he is somehow making everyone look bad (he is not).

I have asked several people to make a case to me as to why he is a great choice for the Court, yet nobody has offered anything thus far. Perhaps you could humor me......

Regards to you, CMG,
BiR (in Asbury Park, NJ)

 

Be careful, CMG: you will be accused of being a RINO for anything less than total support for the President.

Regards,
BiR (now I am in Atlantic City, NJ)

 

CMG,

You RINO.


BiR,

Perhaps I should let OR defend himself, but I don't think his point was in criticism of Ginsburg so much as simply stating where we have wound up with the process with ALL nominees having to tread lightly with their answers, including Ginsburg, who, as several Republicans noted in Alito's hearing, was approved 97 to 3 though the Republicans had no doubt of her liberal judicial philosophy.

Take care, my friend.

 

I heard the other day that committee hearings on court nominees didn't start until 1925. Perhaps we need to go back to the the pre-1925 method of confirming judges.

 

Ken,

The committee hearing process isn't the biggest problem to me. To me, it is the double standard in how nominees are treated. Democratic SCOTUS nominees aren't subjected to anything like Republicans are.

 

That might be different, ftr, the next time a Democratic president sends up a SCOTUS nominee.