The Complete Idiot's Guide to Defeating Alito, Chap 2: Stop Nuclear Option

[Wordie]

The moderate Senators of the Gang of 14 are key in the efforts to stop Alito. They're the ones who have pledged to preserve the filibuster, by agreeing that it should only be used in "extraordinary circumstances." Therefore, we must convince them that the circumstances really are extraordinary.

Here is what I am sending them by FAX:

THE FAILURE OF ALITO TO ANSWER CRUCIAL CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS CONSTITUTES AN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE!

Here are the questions to which we must have answers:
1. Does he accept the new “unitary executive” doctrine that the president has almost full power in interpreting what the president can do and cannot do? Or should the Supreme Court, as it determined in Marbury v. Madison (l803), remain the final arbiter on such issues?

2. In what kind of national emergencies may the president override constitutional guarantees to the rights of individuals in the body of the Constitution (the writ of habeas corpus) or the Bill of Rights (no searches without probable cause)?

If these guarantees are to be suspended under conditions of less than total war, is the president required to report to someone outside the court what he has done?

3. Do signing statements issued by the president provide legal grounds for his refusal to enforce specific provisions in the law? How can this policy be distinguished from the line-item veto, which the Supreme Court has already declared an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power?

President Bush claims authority on all the above issues. Some of Judge Alito’s earlier statements and rulings suggest that he accepts similar constitutional doctrines. If so, his appointment could consolidate the turn of the United States in a new authoritarian direction. If so, we should know it now.

(These questions were developed by BETTY GLAD, Olin Jenkins Professor of Political Science, University of South Carolina, Columbia, and were presented in an editorial which you can read here: http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/opinion/13690848.htm )

With these critical questions outstanding, how can any senator vote for Alito, or allow him to be confirmed? Think of the Anti-torture Act, recently passed by Congress with huge non-partisan support. Bush attached a signing statement, essentially nullifying it's intent. Don't you worry that Judge Alito, if confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, would decide that such clearly illegal acts are constitutional? After all, so many of his writings and speeches support signing statements and other tools to increase the power of the executive. Judge Alito must not be confirmed, you must vote "No" and I also implore you to come out now and publicly state that you will not oppose a filibuster effort by the use of the nuclear option, until those questions are answered.

Sincerely,

******************************************************************************
You can even use additional formatting in your word processing program or FAX to bold and highlight the important parts, if you wish, for more impact.

If you haven't already done so, here is a great way to send a FAX to the Senators from your state (you can only do this once - I tried a second time with this new message and it wouldn't go through).

FAX Your Senators: FREE, easy, online http://www.SaveTheCourt.org/AlitoFax

Even if you have already contacted these Senators to urge them to vote against Alito, they need to be contacted once again, in an effort to convince them not to oppose the filibuster through use of the nuclear option. We do that by convincing them that there really are extraordinary circumstances.

Here are the moderate Senators who must be convinced that there are extraordinary circumstances:
(Note: A call or FAX may be best, as the email form does not allow you to set the topic. If email works best for you, though, please do that! The links are direct ones, and will take you to the Senator's webform page.)

The Gang of 14 Moderate Senators:

Democrats:

Robert Byrd (WV)
311 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://www.byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html
FAX: [phone]

Daniel Inouye (HI)
722 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://www.inouye.senate.gov/webform.html
FAX: [phone]

Mary Landrieu (LA)
724 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://www.landrieu.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
FAX: [phone]

Joseph Lieberman (CT)
706 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Web Form: http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact /
[phone]
FAX: [phone]

Ben Nelson (NE) (He has said he will vote to confirm.)
716 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://www.billnelson.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm
FAX: [phone]

Mark Pryor (AR)
217 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://www.pryor.senate.gov/contact /
FAX: [phone]

K. Salazar (CO)
UNITED STATES SENATE WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm
FAX: [phone]

Republicans:

This moderate Republican isn't really a member of the Gang of 14, but as the Chair of the Judiciary Committee, he is crucially important, so he is included as well:
ARLEN SPECTER (PA)
711 Hart Building, Washington, DC 20510
Phone: [phone]
Web Form:
http://specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInfo.Home
FAX: [phone]

Lincoln Chafee (RI)
141A Russell, Washington, DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: http://chafee.senate.gov/webform.htm
FAX: ) [phone]

Susan Collins (ME)
461 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Phone: [phone]
Web Form: http://collins.senate.gov/public /
FAX: [phone]

Olympia Snowe (ME)
154 Russell Senate Office Bldg., Washington DC 20510
Phone: [phone]
WebForm: http://snowe.senate.gov/Webform.htm
FAX: [phone]

Mike De Wine (OH)
140 Russell Senate Building, Washington, DC 20510
Phone: [phone]
Web Form: http://dewine.senate.gov / (Note: DeWine's site does not have a direct email link. You'll need to follow the link to his site, click on "Contact Information" and then click on the "email' link.)
FAX: [phone]

Lindsey Graham (SC)
290 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
[phone] phone
Web Form: http://lgraham.senate.gov/index.cfm?mode=contactform
FAX: No FAX listed

John McCain (AZ)
241 Russell Senate Office Bldg., Washington DC 20510
Phone: [phone]
WebForm:
http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Contact.Home
FAX: [phone]

John Warner (VA)
225 Russell Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Phone: [phone]
WebForm: http://warner.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfm
FAX: [phone]

[radio4progressives]

1. C'mon people This IS the ISSUE!

Holy Toledo, No one has Responded to this Excellent Post yet?

Well, damn this post needs to be faxed to every Senator, in both parties.

C'mon people This IS the ISSUE!

kicked and Nominated!

[Wordie]

3. Thanks, radioforprogressives. I fear time is running out! eom

[mikelewis]

2. Kicked and nominated...

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. Absolutely. We are thinking the same way on this.

Glad to kick this through a post. Thanks for gathering together the contact information. Here's an OP I wrote on the same theme a couple of days ago:


"Alito and the "Extraordinary" Trap"

"I've been wondering, what exactly would qualify as circumstances extraordinary enough to justify a filibuster against Alito in the eyes of the gang of 14? I'm sure I can think of some. A case of stolen identity perhaps, where it was discovered the real Alito was actually missing and the person seeking to join the Court was instead a skilled impostor. That would probably qualify. Or evidence proving that Alito was really an Iranian double agent, that should do it too. The thing is, it wouldn't take a filibuster to stop Alito from getting onto the Supreme Court if something like that was true.

I know the Senate has grown more partisan over the years, but I still have faith they could pull it together to vote Alito down without needing a filibuster if circumstances like those surfaced. Here's the real rub then, it should be obvious to everyone that circumstances extraordinary enough to justify a filibuster will never be extraordinarily obvious to everyone. If they were there would never be a need for a filibuster, most Senators would simply vote "No" in the first place.

I do get and accept that extraordinary circumstances are supposed to be defined as something really significant, not just a disputed ruling about a portion of a campaign finance law or anything like that. But who decides when a problem with Alito reaches that threshold? Certainly not Senators who have no problem with Alito to begin with. Alito's supporters won't admit there are valid grounds to filibuster against him on, they like Alito the way he is. They WANT Alito on the Supreme Court. It's just Senators who have problems with Alito who are positioned to decide if the problems they have are serious enough, if the circumstances surrounding them are extraordinary enough, to justify a filibuster against Alito. So just forget anything Bill Frist and his allies say about the inappropriateness of threatening a Filibuster against Alito. They really need to excuse themselves from judging this matter. Maybe they can pretend that they own stock in Alito, because for all practical purposes they do.

Here's what I propose. I suggest that the Democrats who already plan to vote against Alito ask themselves the following: Do I have problems with Alito's position regarding Presidential powers relative to the judicial and legislative branches of our government? If the answer is yes, then I humbly suggest they whip out their personal copy of the United States Constitution and review some of the juicier sections, like the Bill of Rights for example. I then suggest they find a major newspaper somewhere, it almost doesn't matter which newspaper they pick, and flip through the pages of a recent weeks worth of stories. Due to an extraordinary set of circumstances they will discover that a major constitutional debate is currently raging throughout our nation.

It involves our fundamental rights as American citizens to be protected from potential abuses by unchecked government power. It involves the specific authority inherent in the Presidency to conduct a war when, where, and how a President sees fit. It involves our fundamental system of checks and balances between the three arms of our government, held dear by our nations founders and enshrined deeply by them in the United States Constitution. And, as circumstances would have it, with each passing day it increasingly looks like the ultimate hearing to determine which authority is and is not legal for the current President to exercise in all of these areas as specified in our Constitution, is headed directly to the Supreme Court to decide. And as further circumstances would have it, the potential swing vote on all of it will likely be cast by a man now nominated by that very same President to serve on the Supreme Court in judgment of him. From a constitutional perspective, the issues can not be more profound, nor the timing more momentous.

It's extraordinary when you think about it."

It's posted on Dembloggers, for some reason the direct link won't post correctly to the entry, but you can find it in the right hand column of recent Diaries on the Home page:

http://www.dembloggers.com/

[Wordie]

5. That's excellent.

:applause:

Have you considered making it an LTTE? It covers things that most haven't thought about, so an LTTE would be a great way to get the ideas the attention they need.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. Thanks, guess I should, we all should be doing everything possible, but...

I just figured out that when I did a cut and paste from the Demblogger site some format thing that had seperated by Diary into parts cut off the top so it didn't make it over here into my original post above! So I just went back and edited and now have added the first few sentances back (which you didn't get to read). Now I have to decide if it was better leaving them out in the first place, lol.

[Wordie]

10. If you're pressed for time, try petitions! They're fast, and there's

strength in numbers.

Thanks to mom cat, there's a huge bunch of them assembled altogether in one post! Here's the thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2384990

[bettyellen]

7. please recommend this people...

and :kick:

[EVDebs]

8. Have him waive his right to avoid self-incrimination and ask about

his views on REX 84, Ollie North's plan to suspend the constitution...

Besides that, on abortion, I think they want to make contraception ultimately illegal; just look at how they're dealing with 'Plan B' !

[Megahurtz]

9. Help! Quick!

If this guy gets in we are all doomed.:nuke: TheDictator will have to answer to no one.

[bettyellen]

11. ....

[FogerRox]

12. great freakin post awesome post

SHUT THE SENATE DOWN

IF THEY SHUT THE SENATE DOWN

WE MARCH ON DC, LIKE IN THE UKRAINE

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

13. Good thinking! Excellent action! Recommended

Sent email with my own reasoning, but using the basic idea re extraordinary circumstances to the following:

Byrd, Lieberman, Salazar, Nelson, Specter,

and a separate one to my own Senator who is also part of the gang of 14, John McCain.

[Wordie]

14. Correction on Ben Nelson's contact info:

Phone: [phone] (Washington D.C.)

http://www.senate.gov/~bennelson/contact/email.cfm

Fax is correct.

My apologies!

(Too bad the information about how he is going to vote to confirm wasn't wrong, too.)

[DWolper]

15. Sorry

You are asking Judge Alito to answer questions that nobody sent up for confirmation to SCOTUS has answered since Robert Bork. None of them. To ask him to answer these questions is pointless. Alito is as good as in. There are consequences to elections. We MUST move on and fight where we can make a difference. Filibuster = Nuclear Option = Democrats Lose.

I hate it. Yet, I have seen it many times over the years. The message to the grassroots is that elections really do have consequences. Let's make 2006 a referendum on the choices (in many areas) of this administration.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

16. Elections have consequences is a talking point, not a profound

statement.

Of course one could argue about the consequences when elections are stolen.

[DWolper]

17. No - Elections having consequences is historical fact .. N/T

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

18. No, it is stating the obvious and it IS a talking point I've heard from

the GOP.

[DWolper]

20. Funny

I remember that 'talking point' used by us in the nineties.
It isn't a damn talking point, as you said - it's obvious, but worth reminding voters in 2006.

[radio4progressives]

19. The message from the grassroots is: Elections have Consequences

They need to employ every thing in their power, and they still have a lot of power, to block and defeat this nomination.

The message from grassroots to "elected" officials is: elections have consequences - do what you were sent to washington to do. fight for us like your own life depended on it, or out you go.

[DWolper]

21. They can count

Political capital must be spent where it can make a difference. The numbers just aren't there. Unfortunately, I might add.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

22. Ah, political capital one of chimpy's favorite expressions. ah yes.n/t

[Wordie]

24. The exception to the nuclear option is "extraordinary circumstances"

And you forget that it is BUSH who has no political capital. And how do you know if the numbers are there or not, if you just give up?

[Wordie]

23. Ahhh, but none of those other SCOTUS nominees said things like this:

In 2000, Alito claimed almost limitless powers for the presidency and criticized other courts for limiting executive power. "The president has not just some executive power," he declared, "but the executive power - the whole thing."

And what is the percentage of Americans who now say Bush should be impeached? I think I saw it was up to 56% now! Why should we approve a nominee who not only no longer has a "mandate" but also may be on the brink of losing his presidency? Does that make sense to you?

These are the "extraordinary circumstances" that are the exception to the nuclear option agreement.

[pat_k]

25. “unitary executive” doctrine = DC Speak for FASCISM

We MUST NOT propagate their lies by pretending ANYONE in their right mind could make a case for an American "unitary executive."

It is a mistake to legitimize this fascist fantasy by attaching the word "doctrine" to it.

"Intelligent Design" has NO PLACE in our Science Classes;
"Unitary Executive" has NO PLACE in the "Marketplace of Ideas."

Instead of their euphemisms, tell the truth in plain speech!

We aren't talking about some abstract rational notion of a "unitary executive" we are talking about the insanity of the Ever-Expanding, Un-American, Un-Constitutional, Dictatorial Powers the Bush Syndicate claims allows them to commit any crime with impunity -- torturing, spying, and terrorizing the American people with the most colossal bomb threat in history: Mushroom Clouds over our cities in 45 minutes – just to name a few.

They claim the authority to do ANYTHING. Lie to us, to "protect" their criminal enterprises. Put babies on Spikes on the White House lawn? Sure! If they decide it's necessary to "deter the terrorists" they claim they have the power to do it.

Don't argue with their fascist fantasies. REJECT THEM WHOLESALE!

Points You May Find Useful

• The fascist fantasies they invoke to convince us their crimes are not crimes must be rejected out of hand. Their fantasies are NOT ideas to be "argued on the merits." They are fantasies that must be rejected out of hand; they have no place in the "marketplace of ideas."


• The NUMBER 1 problem the Democrats have is that the nation views them as weak. Fighting the critical battles WITH EVERYTHING THEY'VE GOT proves strength, conviction, and courage. Failure to stand up proves impotence, equivocation, cowardice. The choice is black and white.


• Alito must be rejected to on principle -- American principle vs Fascist principle.
  It is lunacy to think the constitution gives (or even might give) the President the power to flagrantly violate the collective will of the people codified in the acts and resolutions passed by our Congress.


• Alito told us everything we need to know about him when he offered his standard response -- that he couldn't offer an opinion; that he'd figure it out if it came to the Supreme Court -- to the hypothetical case Sen. Biden posed. (If We the People, through our representatives in the Senate and House, passed a resolution prohibiting the President from ordering any sort of attack on Iran, could the President ignore our will and order Bombs to be dropped on Iran?)


• Like the child who knew the emperor had no clothes, ordinary citizens see the truth. They know that such absolute power is NEVER freely given to a leader; it is only taken by deception or force.


• Alito is emblematic of the ever-expanding dictatorial powers claimed by the Bush Syndicate. The fight to keep Alito off the Court is our Normandy in the fight to defend our constitutional democracy.


• They have three options: FILIBUSTER, Vote Yes, Or Get Out!


• We expect the men and women of our armed services to risk life and limb to fulfill their oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Every member of Congress takes the same oath. We will not tolerate dereliction of duty.

[Wordie]

26. I understand there may be a problem with the Pryor FAX number.

I will look into it in the AM and post it here. Also, Senator Byrd's FAX number, although it worked in the past, appears not to be working this evening. I will look into that one too. (Too late tonight.)