Boston Globe: Alito may be the worst choice

[tuvor]

By Robert Kuttner | January 8, 2006

AT THIS moment in American history, it would be hard to find a worse Supreme Court nominee than Samuel A. Alito Jr. His ideology captures everything extremist about the Bush administration. If confirmed, Alito would serve as Bush's enabler. He would give Bush effective control of all three branches of government and the hard-right long-term dominance of the high court. His confirmation or rejection will depend on the gumption of the Senate Democratic leadership and independence of a few Republicans.

Alito, who would replace the moderate Sandra Day O'Connor, has never hidden his ultra-conservative views. Given the administration claims of an extra-legal presidency, what's most disturbing is the handy convergence of Alito's own conception of executive power and that of Bush.

Citing the wartime powers of the president, Bush has asserted his right to ignore the legislative mandate of Congress in allowing the military to torture prisoners, the government's prerogative to spy on Americans without a court warrant, to treat not just foreigners but US citizens as ''illegal enemy combatants" who lose the constitutional rights of criminal defendants, and to incarcerate such persons indefinitely. Soon, some prisoners at Guantanamo will have been behind bars longer than any German POW during all of World War II.

Presidents do have extraordinary wartime powers, but this president asserts a state of permanent warfare, implying permanent erosion of liberty and democracy. Last week, signing a bill banning torture in interrogations that was forced on him by senior Republican senators, Bush asserted a concept never imagined by the Constitution's framers or permitted by any court -- a ''signing statement" claiming his right to interpret a law in his own fashion and to disregard aspects of it that he doesn't like.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/01/08/alito_may_be_the_worst_choice/

[JDPriestly]

1. Thanks. This is an insightful op-ed piece.

[Spinzonner]

2. Well, of course

That's why he was chosen

[yorkiemommie1]

3. that is exactly why * nominated him

n/t

[David Dunham]

4. Since when is Bernie Sanders a senator as the article states?

[Greeby]

10. January next year

:shrug: Maybe they have a time machine?

[HockeyMom]

5. There is no "war"

A "war" on terror is the same as a "war" on drugs, "war" on poverty, etc., etc. You are not fighting against a defined enemy, but some ideological CONCEPT and as such, the President must NOT use this as an excuse to circumvent the Constitution or to throw out the checks and balances put into our system of government.

We need to get Americans to use their BRAINS and try to understand this.

[bluethruandthru]

6. It's time to make it clear to the Democratic leadership

that we want a filibuster! We want them to use any means available to stop this man from becoming a SCJ! The dems need to stop worrying about appearing "obstructionist". I want them to "obstruct". I'm tired of them bending over and taking anything the repukes shove at us. Look where this has gotten us!

[peacetalksforall]

7. We need Paul Wellstone. Or we need a Paul Wellstone.

Let's hope Byrd does his correct 'thing'.

[ladjf]

8. At some point in the future, Congress may have to impeach and

dismiss one or more Supreme Court judges if it becomes apparent that they are supporting Bush's dictatorship. I'm not sure how this works but I do believe that Congress has the power to do that.

The Bush administration isn't beyond declaring marshal law and refusing to relinquish control of the country.

[Double T]

9. I smell a Democratic Filibuster in the wind..............

I hope the Dems have the backbone for IT!!!!!!