Judge Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. has just been confirmed to be the 110th Associate Justice to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Congratulations to you Justice Alito!
It is a great day for conservatives who have fought so long and hard to return the SCOTUS to an Originalist view of the Constitution.
The final vote was 58 for, and 42 against.
Hugh Hewitt has put up a poll on the President’s nomination today. Click here to cast your opinion on Judge Samuel Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court.
This morning President Bush nominated Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. to be the next Associate Justice to the Supreme Court.
This is an outstanding choice, and we congratulate the President on his choice. He has kept his promise to appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas. His nominee deserves an up or down vote by the Senate, and the nominee deserves to be treated with the respect he has earned.
The extreme left has already begun their attack. The best way to insure that Judge Alito is confirmed quickly and decisively is to insure that a Democrat filibuster never see the light of day.
The following is the contact information for the Republican members of the gang of fourteen:
Senator Warner E-Mail Contact
(202) 224-2023
Senator DeWine Senator DeWine’s Website
(202) (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Fox News, and CNN are reporting that Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination to become a Supreme Court Justice.
Here is a copy of her resignation letter on National Review.
As we stated here, we have a process, God is watching, and we trust in Him.
It has now been five days since President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court of the United States. Much has been written and said about his choice both for and against. Many on the right who are not pleased with his selection have pointed to her lack of a record on the major conservative issues of our day. Those who have chosen to defend his selection are accused of using the argument of trust to defend the President’s decision.
Thomas at Red State has written a compelling argument against Ms. Miers in his article, Thirty Pieces of Silver. Thomas cites three reasons for his support of the Republican Party during the past thirty years. Two of the reasons he has supported the party have already been shattered, fiscal responsibility, and less government regulation on all of our lives. The final reason for his support (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Main Stream Media as well as the blogosphere has been buzzing since President Bush announced his nominee to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court yesterday morning. Already more has been written and said than any normal person could possibly read or absorb.
We don’t claim to be the brightest bulb on the christmas tree, but we do try to apply some common sense when addressing issues such as a Supreme Court Nominee. You can read any article in our Saturday Evening Judicial Review Post category on your left and will soon discover how seriously we take this subject.
The stakes are high, and the nominee if confirmed, will sit on the court for the rest of her life. There are many conservatives who have raised questions and expressed doubts about whether Harriet Miers should be confirmed to the Supreme Court.
Rush Limbaugh stated yesterday that this (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has passed away from complications with thyroid cancer. He was eighty years old.
He will long be remembered for his conservative views and his determination to adhere to the US Constitution. His legacy is that he was a judicial originalist who led in the fight to strike down any law or ruling which did not comply with the original intent of the written Constitution.
Thank you Mr. Chief Justice for your long years of service and hard work.
Democrats are at a loss again in trying to determine how to approach Judge John Roberts’ Senate Judiciary hearings which begin in two weeks.
The New York Times reports in a piece by David D. Kirkpatrick entitled, Senate Democrats Are Split on Tactics for Questioning Roberts (registration required) on the struggle in the Senate Democrat caucus. Here is the dilemma they are facing according to this article:
“Officials of the groups have warned Democrats that if Judge Roberts becomes a Supreme Court vote against their causes - for example, in a New Hampshire abortion rights case expected to be decided before the 2006 elections - they will hold accountable any senator who votes to confirm him. “I think it is a big problem for pro-choice senators if they vote to confirm Judge Roberts and he votes to uphold the New Hampshire law,” said Kate Michelman, (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
The Washington Post story we related here yesterday, has all the earmarks of being a plant.
We believe the article was published on purpose to stir up the liberal fringe base of the Democratic Party. The response was swift and certain. The Washington Post has published another article today which reveals just how tight the leash is on Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Today’s article, Democrats Feel Heat From Left On Roberts , exposes a different Leahy and Kennedy than was referenced yesterday. Here is a portion:
“The response was quick and pointed, as two key senators unleashed their sharpest criticisms yet of Roberts and sought to assure activists that the battle is far from over.
Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Democrat, said in a statement: “Those papers that we have received paint a picture (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
The Washington Post reports today that Democrats concede the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the United States Supreme Court. In their article, Roberts Unlikely To Face Big Fight they report the following:
“Democrats have decided that unless there is an unexpected development in the weeks ahead, they will not launch a major fight to block the Supreme Court nomination of John G. Roberts Jr., according to legislators, Senate aides and party strategists.
In a series of interviews in recent days, more than a dozen Democratic senators and aides who are intimately involved in deliberations about strategy said that they see no evidence that most Democratic senators are prepared to expend political capital in what is widely seen as a futile effort to derail the nomination.
Although they expect to subject President Bush’s nominee to tough questioning at confirmation hearings next month, members of the minority (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
NARAL’s latest attempt to smear Judge John Roberts and to deceive the public about his stance on violence is demonstrated for us in their despicable lie being put forth in a television ad will not succeed. The following are just a few of the links to articles in print, and on the blogosphere which have exposed the lie, and are linked here for you to peruse.
Radio Blogger describes how CNN takes money to run a complete lie of a commercial spot. Generalissimo speaks his mind:
“Go back to a week ago, when conservative musk ox Bob Novak walked off the Inside Politics set after saying B.S. on the air. He was suspended by CNN for his profanity. I put it to you. What is worse? Saying B.S., or taking money to run a special interest hit piece that everyone knows is B.S?”
Chariman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter has definitively gone into the Republican In Name Only category or RINO for short. Conservatives have long suspected that such was the case as evidenced by the huge outcry over his blunder following the 2004 election when he thumbed his nose at President Bush during his victory statement. See this Fox News Story, dated November 5, 2004. The statement came very close to costing the Senator his chairmanship then, and it is evident that it should have.
Senator Specter has once again joined ranks with the Democrats as related by the New York Times, in this story, Panel Chairman to Press Roberts on Cases. (registration required) The following is what he had to say today:
“In a three-page letter to Judge Roberts, Mr. Specter raises pointed questions about two recent court decisions invalidating legislation Congress passed (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Judge John Roberts has filed his reply to the Senate Judiciary’s lengthy questionaire. You can download and read them from the Center For Individual Freedom.
The following is an excerpt from his reply as quoted on the above site:
“It is difficult to comment on either “judicial activism” or “judicial restraint” in the abstract, without reference to the particular facts and applicable law of a specific case. On the one hand, courts should not intrude into areas of policy making reserved by the Constitution to the political branches. As Justice Frankfurter has noted, “Courts are not representative bodies. They are not designed to be a good reflex of a democratic society.” In our democratic system, responsibility for policy making properly rests with those branches that are responsible and responsive to the people. It was precisely because the Framers intended the judiciary to be insulated from popular political pressures (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
The Center For Individual Freedom has an excellent suggestion page for those want to help in getting Judge John Roberts confirmed to the Supreme Court. (HT to Confirm Them)
Their request is to, Send a letter of support for Judge Roberts’ Supreme Court nomination to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The following are their suggestions which should be implemented immediately:
“The White House and Senate leaders have repeatedly told CFIF that the most critical thing organizations and individuals can do to help with Judge Roberts’ nomination is to send letter of support to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
If you’re able to send a letter of support, it’s critical that the Judiciary Committee receive it as soon as possible.
Here are some basic instructions for preparing and sending your letters in order to make sure they are properly received:
1) Write a persuasive, professional letter (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Ed Whelan over at Bench Memos has an optimistic view of the leftist strategy in an article entitled, Our Allies on the Left. He first outlines their possible strategies for obstructing the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court, then demonstrates the one they adopted, which eventually will help conservatives. Here is a portion:
“The third course—whether it deserves the label of “strategy” is dubious—that the Democrats have in fact adopted is one of using document demands and other maneuvers to try to delay the Senate’s confirmation of Roberts, in the hope that ammunition to use against him will develop in the meantime. This strategy gives every promise of backfiring. Set aside for now whether the White House has adopted a coherent position on which documents from Roberts’s past service in the executive branch should be made available. It now appears that these (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
While the “emanation of penumberas” (more later on what that means) from the “fever swamp” (as Hugh Hewitt would say) of the left get into full swing, we thought it might be a good time to review some of the opinions and briefs which Judicial Nominee John Roberts has written.
Most of the left are referring to this case, which is by the way, Hedgepeth v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, as part of their reasoning to oppose a confirmation of Judge Roberts. Their argument is of course that Judge Roberts did not afford this 12 year old girl protection under the fourth and fifth amendments of the Constitution. The left has gotten used to the judiciary making up law when there is none to fit their pre-determined outcome. As a matter of course, it is now common practice for the left to challenge laws they (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
President Bush has nominated to the Supreme Court, Judge John G. Roberts, Jr, currently serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The following are links to information on Judge Roberts.
Here is an article describing Judge Roberts, D.C. Circuit Judge Gets on Supreme Court Short List.
This is his Department of Justice Bio.
More information from Supreme Court Nomination Blog entitled, Potential Nominee Profile–Judge John G. Roberts.
Congratulations Mr. President for a job well done!
Update:
Hugh Hewitt calls it a “A home run for the president, the SCOTUS, and for the United States”.
CBS Radio News, has just reported that the announcement for President Bush’s Supreme Court Nomination will be made tonight at 9:00 PM EDT. Fox News is now reporting the same.
What is originalism?
There is much confusion about what the differences are between originalism and activism when talking about Supreme Court nominees these days. With that in mind, we thought it might be a good idea to define what originalist actually means.
In our search for a definition, we discovered that Edward Whelan has written an article for the National Review Online, which asks the question, Are You an Originalist? We found the article to be quite interesting as well as educational. The following is his test to see if you are an originalist:
“Here’s my simple single-question multiple-choice test for whether you are an originalist:
Q. The Constitution provides, as one of the criteria to be eligible to become president, that a person must be a “natural born Citizen” (or, alternatively, in a provision that long ago ceased to apply to any (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
There are two excellent reasons why President Bush should not nominate Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to be the next Associate Justice on the Supreme Court.
Reason number one, is that the Attorney General more than likely will turn out to be another Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. If you want an unbridled, uncensored, look at Justice O’Connor’s legacy, you should read, Reagan’s biggest mistake finally retires, by Ann Coulter. The article written for World Net Daily, is a no holds barred, down and dirty, hold nothing back, tell us how you really feel commentary on Justice O’Connor’s regime on the Supreme Court. The following is just a taste of what she has written:
“It’s often said that O’Connor’s problem is that she is not a judge, but a legislator. On the basis of her bright idea to replace 10 blindingly clear words in the Constitution (”Congress shall (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Update [2005-7-8 17:20:42 by Erick]: at Red State “William Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States, has retired. A White House statement is forthcoming.”
Update 16:30 CDT:
Erick has added this caveat: “A very good source says this.”
Update 16:45 CDT:
Erick at Restate is calling it official.
“I am reliably told that details are being worked out to give the Chief Justice an appropriate send off as the head of the third branch of American government. While the official announcement may be delayed to allow time to coordinate, I think the sources are most likely right and, despite my gut feeling that we’ve all bought into a Novak generated feeding frenzy, I’ll go with the sources, Novak, and Drudge and make it official.
William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States, has retired.”
Update 17:45 CDT:
Obviously no announcement will be coming tonight. Erick at Restate, has posted the following:
“Update [2005-7-8 18:1:28 by Erick]: Drudge has nixed the “tonight” part of his headline. The White House has put on a full lid. I’m saying nothing will come about tonight. Monday perhaps. I’m going home.”
With the President’s admonishment to “tone down” the rhetoric, especially about his friend Attorney General Gonzales, the right has responded in kind.
Michelle Malkin writes succinctly in an article entitled, No, YOU “Tone It Down”, quoting Laura Ingraham, who said the following:
“In a slightly disturbing interview in USA TODAY, President Bush tells everyone to “tone down” the rhetoric. That’s funny, that’s what the Democrats are saying too. The President, in fact, needs conservatives to be mobilized, passionate, and strong in their support of his nominee–toning it down never helps the GOP. (see, e.g., the fights over Bolton, Estrada, and Bork.)”
Michelle has quite a take on the above words. Read the whole thing and the links.
Krempasky at Red State makes a compelling argument for President Bush not to nominate Attorney General Gonzales in, Demoralizing the base. He (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Why should conservatives oppose an appointment of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the Supreme Court?
First, in a Texas Supreme Court case, In re Jane Doe, then Justice Priscilla Owen who dissented to the majority ruling, had the following to say concerning that opinion:
“…this Court has usurped the role of the trial court, reweighed the evidence, and drawn its own conclusions. The Court has forsaken any semblance of abiding by principles of appellate review.”
and she further stated:
“It is the Court who has acted irresponsibly in this case by summarily rendering judgment without careful consideration of the record, by manufacturing reasons to support its actions, and by ignoring the evidence that supports the trial court’s judgment.
* * * * * I dissent from the Court’s judgment in this case and from the manner in which this appeal has been resolved. The Court has disregarded the (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
“Follow the path, Mr. Masoudi. Walk where the great men before you have walked.” Professor William Hundert, The Emperor’s Club, 2002
There is a whole host of writers and commentator’s speculating and offering opinions on who will be the next Associate Justice on The United States Supreme Court. Most are offering great advice based upon political objectives and achievements. There are some from the left who offer no advice at all, except to obstruct anyone who will not fit in their particular ideological system. There are those on the right who have worked tirelessly to arrive at this moment in our nation’s history. Today we want to look at some articles which have great relevance pertaining to the choice the President will soon make on who will replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
We begin with Nine Tips for Bush on the Supreme Court Vacancy, written by (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Confirm Them, is reporting from their sources, A Round Up Of Sources, the following:
- This morning John Cornyn was seen at the White House. He is rumored to have then had a private meeting with key staffers.
- Last my source told me this morning, Garza is still at the top of the list.
- As for Rehnquist? Several key players in the Senate were told by the White House that he was out this week. My source says the White House went into confusion mode over this. Everyone had expected Rehnquist.
- As for Gonzales. POTUS is POTUS and sources tell me that though the political calculus equates to suicide, POTUS still wants Gonzales.
The National Review Online wrote on June 28th, an article entitled, No to Justice Gonzales. Here is an excerpt:
“Finally, the president has to know (Read the rest of the story below the fold...)
Fox News is reporting that Justice Sandra Day O’connor’s resignation is imminent. Brian Wilson is quoting three separate sources.
Update:
Eric at Red State, says it will be Garza who will be appointed. Krempasky at Confirm Them says it will come by noon.
Update:Fox News has the letter.
Update:
Bush will speak on TV shortly after 11:00 AM Eastern.
Update:
From SCOTUSblog, SOC Letter of Resignation:
“This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor. It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure.”
Update:
Fox News says, no announcement of a nominee by Bush at 11:15 AM Eastern.
