Senate confirms Bush nominee Alito to high court

[UpInArms]

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-01-31T160816Z_01_WBT004688_RTRIDST_0_COURT-ALITO-VOTE-URGENT.XML

WASHINGTON, Jan 31 (Reuters) - A sharply divided U.S. Senate on Tuesday confirmed Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, backing a second conservative nominated by President George W. Bush in his effort to move the nation's highest court to the right.

The near party-line vote to replace the more moderate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor with Alito, a federal appeals judge since 1990, came four months after the Senate approved Bush's first Supreme Court nominee, John Roberts, as U.S. chief justice.

Alito is expected to align himself with the court's solidly conservative bloc and could affect the outcome of votes on key social issues such as abortion and civil rights.

...short blurb...

:cry:

[converted_democrat]

1. I feel lost......n/t

[Postmanx]

15. It was bound to happen

[converted_democrat]

29. I realize that to some degree, but it doesn't make it hurt any less...n/t

[izzybeans]

2. Wow they release breaking news before the final tally.

Happened just now 11:17 a.m. January 31st.

[UpInArms]

5. wasn't it Stalin that said:

"It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes."?

[izzybeans]

9. I believe so. And he should know he was well versed in the art of

oppression.

[UpInArms]

7. the "timestamp" on that article is Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:09 AM ET

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-01-31T160816Z_01_WBT004688_RTRIDST_0_COURT-ALITO-VOTE-URGENT.XML

Senate confirms Bush nominee Alito to high court
Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:09 AM ET

[izzybeans]

8. It could have been when the 50th vote has passed. The timing may have

been correct. I just thought it was amazing to see this thread and watch the actual vote take place at the same time.

[JNelson6563]

3. Sickening.

I sure hope there is a concerted effort to oust those who voted for this nightmare. We also need to get a majority so this can't happen again.

Heartsick but determined--
Julie

[hallc]

4. This sucks

i am so disappointed. :cry:

[Mithras61]

6. Just exactly how "near"...

is this "near party line vote." I want to know who crossed the party lines and in which direction. If any Dems are in the group that voted FOR Scalito, they need to pay (with their seat, preferably in the Primary, but would accept this November).

[hallc]

10. go here

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11102055/

[hallc]

11. looks like 4 crossed over to the dark side

Ben Nelson - Nebraska voted Yea
Kent Conrad - North Dakota voted Yea
Tim Johnson - South Dakota voted Yea
Robert C. Byrd - West Virginia voted Yea


Edited to add Ben Nelson, which i missed in my quick skim of the list

[Mithras61]

14. You missed..

Ben Nelson - Nebraska.

Ladies & Gentlemen, I propose that we inform the DSCC that we will no longer support them, as they contribute to these traitors and that we send our campaign contributions directly to those who are real Dems.

VegasWolf, you're right about the cloture vote. I extend my proposition to include those who voted in favor of cloture, because they knew (or should have known) that a vote for cloture was a vote for Alito's confirmation.

From the Wahington Post

Roll Call of the Cloture Vote

The Associated Press tallied the 72-25 vote:

On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to end the debate and a "no" vote was a vote to filibuster the nomination.
Voting "yes" were 19 Democrats and 53 Republicans.
Voting "no" were 24 Democrats and one independent.!

Democrats Yes
Akaka, Hawaii; Baucus, Mont.; Bingaman, N.M.; Byrd, W.Va.; Cantwell, Wash.; Carper, Del.; Conrad, N.D.; Dorgan, N.D.; Inouye, Hawaii; Johnson, S.D.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Lieberman, Conn.; Lincoln, Ark.; Nelson, Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Pryor, Ark.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.

Democrats No
Bayh, Ind.; Biden, Del.; Boxer, Calif.; Clinton, N.Y.; Dayton, Minn.; Dodd, Conn.; Durbin, Ill.; Feingold, Wis.; Feinstein, Calif.; Kennedy, Mass.; Kerry, Mass.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Menendez, N.J.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Obama, Ill.; Reed, R.I.; Reid, Nev.; Sarbanes, Md.; Schumer, N.Y.; Stabenow, Mich.; Wyden, Ore.

Democrats Not Voting
Harkin, Iowa.

<snip>

[hallc]

17. ah. yes i did miss him

i just did a quick glance

[yppahemnkm]

34. Why didn't Harkin vote?

[EuroObserver]

38. There was also an abstention from Rockefeller(D)? n/t

[President Kerry]

47. Ettu, Robert Byrd?

Decades of Senate leadership, the fiery Iraq war speech, a great book (Losing America), staunchly independent. Why? WHY??? What the $(*#$ did you see in him that made you vote for him?

[VegasWolf]

12. Doesn't matter, voting FOR cloture was the COWARD way of voting FOR

Alito.

[Javaman]

13. I weep for our future...

:cry:

[chelsea0011]

16. So what is the earliest timetable for Roe v. Wade being overturned?

Is there anything pending in the current session to make it happen?

[Orangepeel]

20. It won't be overturned directly

From past votes, it would seem that Justice Kennedy would vote against a direct reversal, which would make the vote 5 - 4 (Kennedy, Stevens, Ginsberg, Souder, Breyer vs. Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas).

However, based on past votes, Kennedy tends to be in favor of allowing states to pass restrictions on abortion that make abortion an option that is very difficult to choose. (on the other hand, it is already very difficult or impossible for a poor woman to obtain an abortion in many parts of the country, so I don't know how much will change)

[JPace]

26. I recently saw a t.v. interview of a physician who

regularly performs abortions....he believed that if Alito were confirmed that Roe v Wade
would be overturned within one year.

[Orangepeel]

30. he's entitled to his opinion

:shrug:

But I don't believe that past votes of the sitting Justices support it. Kennedy has voted to uphold decisions chipping away at abortion rights (e.g., late term abortions) but has already declined to overturn R v W.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

35. probably correct too- The beginning of a "NEW" U.S of"A"-all opposition

will be swiftly dealt with--no news media will be covering the "cleansing"

[Wordie]

21. No timetable here...but a bit more from the article:

...Alito is expected to align himself with the court's solidly conservative bloc and could affect the outcome of votes on key social issues such as abortion and civil rights.

...Though he opposed abortion while serving in the Reagan administration two decades ago, Alito promised at his confirmation hearing to respect legal precedent, which includes a 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. Still, to the consternation of foes, he did not say how he would rule.

:(

[Mithras61]

28. So what?

In his confirmation hearings to the circuit court, he promised that he woul.d recuse himself on any cases involving Vanguard. He didn't bother with that, so why should we believe anything hew says in confirmation hearings now?

[Wordie]

32. I'm not even certain he really DID promise, as his comments about stare

decisis were qualified, as I recall. :(

[Mithras61]

41. I didn't actually see the hearings, only read reports...

and I was led to believe that he wouldn't commit to supporting stare decisis, which was (I thought) fundamental to jurisprudence.

[Wordie]

46. Here's what Alito said in the hearings about stare decisis:

JUDGE SAMUEL ALITO: When a precedent is reaffirmed, each time it's reaffirmed that is a factor that should be taken into account in making the judgment about stare decisis, and when a precedent is reaffirmed on the ground that stare decisis precludes or counsels against reexamination of the merits of the precedent, then I agree that that is a precedent on precedent.

Now, I don't want to leave the impression that stare decisis is an inexorable command because the Supreme Court has said that it is not but it is a judgment that has to be based taking into account all of the factors that are relevant and that are set out in the Supreme Court's cases.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june06/alito_1-10.html

That second paragraph seems to leave a door open... :(

[imperialismispasse]

23. They won't overturn it.

The neocons need RVW. They won't overturn on a federal level. Instead they will chip away at state's rights until there is nothing left in the red states.

[against all enemies]

44. Nothing left but Republicans driving their daughters to Blue states

for medical procedures.

[Strong Atheist]

18. Sigh. Well, back to the fight. This just means we have to

resist more ... NGU!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

19. It may be a dark day . . .

but the sun will shine again. I'm pissed as hell--maybe more than when the election was stolen from Gore--and I'm going to channel that anger into doing something about the sorry state of our Democratic party.

[Xenotime]

22. This is a dark day for America.

This country will never be the same. Shame on * and shame on repugs.

[demo dutch]

24. 4 dems voted YEA!, Nebraska, The Dakotas, & W Virginia

[hogwyld]

25. I hope

That Justice Stevens lives a lot longer so that * can't replace him.

[greenisin]

27. Why was there not more done to fight this?

I just don't understand. Was there some sort of backroom deal?

[onehandle]

31. Thanks, Ralph. nt

[Zhade]

43. Okay, this is getting fucking ridiculous.

Nader didn't have any impact on the 2004 race. Diebold did. Homophobia did.

Thanking Nader for this makes about as much sense as saying the United States is the best country on earth - neither is even remotely true.

[onehandle]

49. Um...2000?

Out of 90,000 Nader Florida voters, less than 1% for Gore would have made the difference.

After 2000, Nader became irrelevant. But in 2000 he worked hard to be a spoiler.

30+ years of a Conservative court. Thanks, Ralph.

[Zhade]

53. And if 200,000 Florida Dem voters hadn't voted for b*s*...

...and if Gore hadn't won anyway (which he did) and they hadn't stopped the recount that would have showed he won (they did) and the USSC hadn't made a partisan, one-time-only non-precedental ruling in favor of the guy whose father put them on the court (they did)...

Nader is about .01% of the issue. Pay attention to him, ignore the coup that happened, and I'm sure the republicans will be happy with you.

[Voltaire99]

51. Anything but blaming the miserable appeasers, eh?

Yes: it must be that evil mastermind Nader who makes the party again and again fall down before Bushism!

How does he do it?

[symbolman]

33. I'm seriously thinking of starting a third party

and strange as it may sound I want to call it the "Cool" Party. Coolers.

COOL is Not COLD.

It is NOT COOL to starve old folks and children. It is NOT COOL to kill ANYONE. It is NOT COOL to invade women's bodies or make their decisions for them. It is NOT COOL to have no health insurance for ALL americans.

It is NOT COOL to start wars for no reason.

Who doesn't want to be COOL?

I can't support much of what the Green Party advocates and they have too much baggage, too vilified by the general public, not that I'm not cool with environmental stances, etc. SOME of what they espouse is Cool with me and most americans.

The platform is basically calling out everything that is not COOL with US. Get a new direction, a style, a way of thinking that everyone wants to be involved in.

Of course if YOU are COOL then you are already a charter member :)

I'm not kidding :)

[Placebo]

36. You know what's even scarier?

Bush still has time enough left in his term to nominate more Supreme Court justices.

[President Kerry]

48. we'll take back Congress and impeach the SOB.

You can either help make it happen or watch it happen.

[UpInArms]

37. UPDATE: This shotgun "wedding" thing - He has already been "sworn in"

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-01-31T185251Z_01_N31400081_RTRIDST_0_COURT-ALITO-UPDATE-2.XML

WASHINGTON, Jan 31 (Reuters) - Samuel Alito was sworn in as a U.S. Supreme Court justice on Tuesday after a divided Senate confirmed the second conservative selected by President George W. Bush in his effort to move the high court to the right.

Chief Justice John Roberts, Bush's first Supreme Court nominee, administered the constitutional and judicial oaths in a private ceremony at the court, a spokeswoman said.

Just hours earlier, the sharply divided Senate confirmed Alito, 55, a federal appeals judge since 1990, to the nation's highest court on a largely party line vote of 58-42.

Alito became the 110th member of the Supreme Court, replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate conservative who retired. He is expected to align himself with the court's solidly conservative bloc and could affect the outcome of votes on key social issues such as abortion and civil rights.

...more...

Does anyone else feel like this was RAMMED through in a hurry?

[Mithras61]

42. I think they're making sure...

that Scalito is on the bench when the appeal about the ban on "Partial Birth Abortion" comes up to the SCOTUS.

[mvd]

39. A Very Sad Day In America

To all the Repukes who are being happy, your turn will come when Alito does something that you too don't like. His case was the classic case of extraordinary circumstances.

The fight has only started, though. Some people didn't expect Kerry or the 24 other brave Senators to stick up for our rights.

[Copperhead 2000]

40. We need to recall Alito

Let's all write to our Congressmen and get them to amend the constitution so that Supreme Court justices can be recalled by popular vote.

[jus_the_facts]

45. the Puppet Masters rejoice....

:patriot:

[leesa]

50. Shame on our Senate.

[Voltaire99]

52. LOL. Who didn't expect it?

Even at play-acting tough, the party isn't very convincing.

Thanks--once again--for nothing.

[wordpix2]

54. young women, get your favorite coat-hanger back alley abortionist ready

to do the job if you need it