Posted on 10/28/2005 8:33:00 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
Multiple sources are telling RedState that Samuel A. Alito, Jr. of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals will be named by the President at the next associate justice of the United States Supreme Court as early as Monday.
“The situation is still in flux,” says one source, “but not very much.” Says another, “The White House Counsel’s Office is not doing too good at keeping this a secret.”
Still another source says, “Luttig and Alito were the fall backs to Miers. They have both been vetted. Alito seems more palatable. There is no need to drag this out, he’s been vetted a million times.”
And yet another source tells me that he is convinced Alito is the nominee barring some last minute unforeseen issue. All signs are pointing to Judge Alito right now. Things could change, but as the weekend draws closer it seems more and more likely that Judge Alito will be the nominee and conservatives will have a fight on their hands in the Senate — a very winnable fight.
Trial balloon.
Do you think they're floating the name out? How did he fair when nominated by Bush Sr?
******
The Senate unanimously confirmed Samuel Alito to the Third Circuit on April 27, 1990.
http://www.cwfa.org/printerfriendly.asp?id=3405&department=legal&categoryid=misc
Please God let this be true.
If this is true, I'll certainly feel like borking Harriet E. Miers was a good thing.
I'm a Luttig supporter, mostly because he's who I'm most familiar with. The more I read about Alito, the more I'm liking him, though.
"A dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), arguing that a Pennsylvania that required women seeking abortions to inform their husbands should have been upheld. As Judge Alito reasoned, "[t]he Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems--such as economic constraints, future plans, or the husbands' previously expressed opposition--that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion." Chief Justice Rehnquist's dissent from the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision striking down the spousal notification provision of the law quoted Judge Alito's dissent and expressed support for Judge Alito's reasoning."
Wow. This will put the DUers on suicide watch.
Good point!
The only thing is, do you think that a woman should be required to notify her husband that she's having an abortion if the baby is clearly not his?
Regarding your post covering Alito's opinions: Wow opinions! What a concept. I love him.
I like your thinking, and other presidents before him have floated out nominees knowing that they would probably get defeated, but I really think that he picked her because he knows her judicial philosophy is like his...and because he felt being chief counsel is experience enough.
I recall now that before the Roberts nominee the president said that "we are looking for people who are outside of the judicial community, who are not judges." I think he was thinking of her from the beginning but because of the Rehnquist death chose Roberts.
SCALITO!
Or squeals like a pig
Yew shore have a purdy mouff...
Rules are rules.
The RULES!!!!
[[I love the pick, but I have always hated to be lied to. One of my pet peeves I'm afraid, and the WH did just that with their excuse of no one else wanted the job. It was nothing more than a steaming pile of crap from a WH I have less respect for.]]
Would I be safe in assuming you are a Buchananite paleo-con ? These types of opinions seem to be prevalent among that wing of the conservtives.
Check the bottom of the case. Alito wrote a separate opinion.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=3rd&navby=case&no=995272
Judge Lance Alito? Cool. I remember him from the OJ trial.
(That was a joke, don't reply...)
I'd still prefer JRB, but I could definitely live comfortably with Scalito.
Because that's how you make the Senate stronger.
To my way of thinking, retaking the Supreme Court and ending unconstitutional “legislation” by judges is our strongest issue with the people. It got George W Bush elected—twice. It got 55 Republican senators elected. It sent Tom Daschle home.
Now, if what we’ve worked for, voted for, bled for for the past 35 years can’t happen because our elected senators and our president refuse to give us what we sent them there for, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT.
If George W Bush sent up Luttig, and after he was rejected sent McConnell, and after he was rejected sent Estrada, and after he was rejected sent Jones, and then Brown, and so on and so on, the people would rally to him and there would be 70 Republican senators before long.
This presupposes, of course, that George W Bush (a) thinks the Court issue is important; (b) understands what’s wrong with the status quo; and (c) would be pleased with a Court of Luttigs, Browns, and Estradas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.