ALITO HEARINGS TO START JANUARY 9

NRO ^ | 11/3/05 | Kathryn Jean Lopez

[smokeman]

ALITO HEARINGS begin January 9 at noon, according to Specter. Floor vote on 20th, the chairman hopes.

[SoFloFreeper]

And, a SCOTUS review of it's own campaign finance ruling will be heard.........."

That's right kids, Jan 14th 2006.

Now you know why the Rats want to delay this until next year. O'Connor will be gone when the decision is handed down but Alit will not be there for the arguments so he won't vote.

Keeps CFR where it is now, which is BS.

So, let's hope CJ Roberts sees the ploys involved and RESCHEDULES the hearing for February 1. :)

[TeleStraightShooter]

On the upside this takes away the "we don't know enough - so we must filibuster" argument.

[shield]

I was thinking the same thing when I came across your post - Recess him and then by next year, elections over and no politicking for those losers and then they can have the hearings without the BS!

Since specter is such a R.I.N.O. helping the dembos....

MR PRESIDENT...use your RECESS APPOINTMENT ABILITY...

RECESS APPOINTMENT FOR JUDGE ALITO!!!

Get him on the court during the upcoming holidays!!!

[b4its2late]

Specter is a disgrace. He's foot dragging.

[American Quilter]

Time to withhold my RNC money. AGAIN.

Any time I get an RNC solicitation in the mail, I place the green "All of my political contributions are made through the Club For Growth" sticker on the donation card and mail it back. Makes me feel better!

The Club For Growth, now run by Pat Toomey, supports true conservative candidates, and doesn't hesitate to identify the RINOs. Their URL: www.clubforgrowth.com.

[Jo Nuvark]

OK... any chance of a recess appointment?

Just asking? :)

[Jo Nuvark]

I sent a note to the beggers at the RNC
back before the gang of 14 was organized.

NO JUDICIAL CONFIRMATIONS FROM YOU...
NO MORE MONEY FROM ME!

[tennmountainman]

Lots of nominee's are still waiting in limbo for the Gang of 14 Idiots to put their stamp of approval.
And now Specter wants to delay as long as possible to drum up dirt on Alito.
Frist is a wiennie for allowing that to happen.
What a bunch of losers, those senators are

[George W. Bush]

Honestly, this all accrues to Trent Lott. He is manuevering to blast Frist out of his spot,...

I've thought this too. From the beginning of the Miers flap, I've had the feeling Lott is looking for a way to move back to Majority Leader. I'm trying to figure out if I should cheer for Lott or Frist. It's hard to be enthusiastic.

[George W. Bush]

Why does this have to take so long? That's 2 months from now. They could have been having the Miers' hearings this week. Why not just put Alito in that slot?

The Court and Senate will both be recessed for over five weeks of the eight from what I gather. And Alito does have 15 years of rulings (300 opinions he wrote). So he does take more prep work by staff just to ask him a decent question. And given how brilliant he is, these senators don't want to look like the second-rate lawyer hacks that they really are. You have seen our senators, haven't you?

Not to worry. If Alito is seated before the season's opinions are issued, the cases have to be reheard. That's what they keep telling us anyway. Whether they will only be reheard if O'Connor was a swing vote or whether it's all of them, I still don't know. But this rule is why justices usually retire at the end of the season or before it begins. O'Connor had to screw even this up.

[right-wingin_It]

I'd cheer for neither. They're both for embryonic stem cell research, and that floors me. And I justify that statement below...

The divide between asses and elephants is now social issues. Abortion is THE primary unifying plank of the Democratic Party. Although the homosexual agenda also a close second. Without the Republicans actively picking up "Christian leftovers" as they did, they would have been TOAST. Loose the Christians, and say goodbye to life as we know it.

[right-wingin_It]

(Finishing my comment in #151) What's more, there are many more Christians to be "mined" from the Democratic Party. We have only seen the tip of the iceberg. This strategy will sustain Republican numbers and (and a conservative agenda) for the long term.

[George W. Bush]

The divide between asses and elephants is now social issues. Abortion is THE primary unifying plank of the Democratic Party. Although the homosexual agenda also a close second. Without the Republicans actively picking up "Christian leftovers" as they did, they would have been TOAST. Loose the Christians, and say goodbye to life as we know it.

I agree that the Religious Right is indispensable to the GOP. But I would also say that the recent Miers dustup showed us other powerful currents in the GOP. When the info about Miers and affirmative action came out, I saw at least a half-dozen who had supported her till then turn on her, citing only that. And we saw a lot of grassroots support and rumblings in the conservative media over borders and spending.

Beyond those, the encroaching globalism, the distrust of the U.N. and Europe, friendship with Europe, enmity with Castro and his allies, the War On Terror and even the War On Drugs, these are all areas which different people would put high on their list to vote GOP.

You're not wrong about the Christians by any means. It's just that there are still other blocs of thought that also march under the GOP banner. And then there are the more liberal GOP elements besides. What's more, there are many more Christians to be "mined" from the Democratic Party. We have only seen the tip of the iceberg. This strategy will sustain Republican numbers and (and a conservative agenda) for the long term.

I think we've already got most of the really sincere Christians. What's left in the Dim tent are those who are apostate from orthodox Christian belief.

When you hear Dean say things like 'guns and gays' or the other day when Biden said he was going to ram his rosary beads down the throats of the next Republican who questioned his religious views, or Hollyweird attacking religion you can see what I mean. The other side are classic hypocrites or the kind of liberals who enjoy some occasional Christian role-playing by sitting around in a circle, nude, chanting poetry.

[right-wingin_It]

About the mining of Christians out of the Democratic Party...I just have my own personal experience to offer. But I know plenty of folks who could be defined "liberal moderates," but have been long unhappy with the "new lunacy" in their Churches. They're jumpin ship...little more time and we'll see. Trust me.

Of course, a proper strong and continuous conservative dialog with these folks will facilitate this to its reality.

[George W. Bush]

I agree about the ship-jumping types. A recent lady advocate for sodomy at the local liberal establishment resulted in the last few God-fearing types bailing out on them. But the exodus was only a small handful. The rest stayed in even after other provocative incidents they didn't like.

So I'll grant you there's some mining work remaining.

[austinaero]

Excellent, gives us all time to zip off a little note to our Congressional Reps.

[GOP-Pat]

Thanks for the info. I knew that they were holding off, hoping some important things would be settled before O'Connor leaves. Hopefully, Roberts will hold off too.

[EGPWS]

The US Senate is a disgrace.

The minority is desperate and the majority is focused on bigger concerns.

To both parties it boils down to "politics before country".

[right-wingin_It]

Thanks for the info. I have a question. How long after the oral arguments are the decisions made? I know they are anounced in the spring, but how long after oral arguments are the votes cast?? It would be nice if the new justice (Alito) would be given the transcript of the oral argument, then votes. Is there a rule, that the justice who hears the oral argument must be the one who casts their vote (and not the incommng judge)?

[Cboldt]

How long after the oral arguments are the decisions made?

The timing varies, mostly depending on the urgency of the case. For example, the 2000 Presidential election cases were decided in periods measured in days. Not all decisions are handed down "in the spring."

It would be nice if the new justice (Alito) would be given the transcript of the oral argument, then votes. Is there a rule, that the justice who hears the oral argument must be the one who casts their vote (and not the incommng judge)?

I don't think there is a rule, but a judge who does not aprticipate in oral argument does not participate in the decision. If the decision is tied, the Court may decide, on its own, to conduct a rehearing.

RS22300 - The Retirement of Justice O'Connor:
Quorum Requirements, Rehearings and Vote Counts in the Supreme Court. http://www.opencrs.com/getfile.php?rid=43305

Past cases - dates of argument, dates of decision ...
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/index.html

Case previews for this term ...
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/