Posted on 10/29/2005 5:23:51 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
WASHINGTON - Rebounding from the failed nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, President Bush is poised to select between two of the nation's leading conservative federal appeals court judges - both experienced jurists with deep backgrounds in constitutional law - for what promises to be a bruising Senate confirmation battle.
With an announcement expected Sunday or Monday, administration officials have narrowed the focus to Judges Samuel Alito of New Jersey and Michael Luttig of Virginia, sources involved in the process said. Both have sterling legal qualifications and solid conservative credentials, and both would set off an explosive fight with Senate Democrats, who are demanding a more moderate nominee to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
No one.
But if you do not like speculation over his choice, and you are on a thread where the main article concerns speculation, logic follows this is not a place one would spend their time. Given you've made the identical statement in a few separate threads, it seems very curious.
Oh I agree. But you know the left. They still think it should be an equal trade- O'Connor should be replaced with someone just like her. Heh.
Wrong, but I am playing Godfather II on my dvd, as I write this reply. Maybe too much wine tonight? {I could have said dago red]. Have a little fun, 50 years from now, anybody reading this is not going to know the difference. But we will know if there really is a God, and did he loan Rush his talent.
So are you saying that Luttig wouldn't overturn Roe??
I'm from SW Ohio. If DeWine balks here he is in DEEP DEEP doo-doo with his base here and will have a primary fight in february. I'd look for DeWine at least to stay in line.
He'll pick a woman to replace Ruthie.
>>>Given you've made the identical statement in a few separate threads, it seems very curious.
What's even more curious is your preoccupation with that. You could just ignore it...but it seems you can't, for whatever reason. Why don't you try ignoring me from here on - can you do that?
What are the chances of a primary challenge for DeWine anyway? Last I heard no one was willing to step up.
If anyone wants to call either them an empty skirt, they'll answer to me.
It doesn't have to be a woman, but either of those women make the judiciary hearing worthy of pay per view.
My pick is Luttig, but if Bush prefers Alito I'll be very pleased to support it.
Maybe Luttig can be the next pick. Because EVERY ONE of these picks has got to be top notch. The Dems have controlled the court for fifty years. We need to change the balance long-term if there is to be any hope of undoing all that damage.
I agree, I hope it is Littig, he's the one I wanted to see "W" pick before Miers.
Former AK Steel president John Hritz declared to run against DeWine then got made an offer to run for a lower statewide office and took the offer. So far there is no credible challenger and John Kasich is unlikely to step up. Former Congressman Bob McEwen might step up to plate, especially if DeWine goes wabbly again. That last part is my speculation.
interstate commerce
You could drive a truck through your interpretation of interstate commerce. Strict constructionism includes strictly interpreting the commerce clause
It's just one of those places where we disagree. Cheers.
I'm open to evidence that suggests the contrary, but right now, I don't like what I'm seeing.
That was a false report.
Too bad about Hritz.
If someone would declare against him, DeWine would be guarenteed to lose the primary. As is, his chances of re-election are chancy already given conservative hostility.
>Bush will be praised but in reality it will be a capitulation
Bush will choose based on his assessment of what the GOP Senators can deliver. It's not his capitulation to capitulate. Not much that we have seen this year should give him, or us, hope. And the fire and fervor we witnessed over Miers should be directed, this time, at the right target(s).
I believe Torie's comments on this thread, and CT's elsewhere, are consonant with my view of this.
Alito is widely perceived as easier to confirm than Luttig, but on the abortion issue he could be more controversial. He wrote a dissent in a 1991 case that would have upheld a Pennsylvania law requiring women to notify their husbands before obtaining an abortion unless they were worried about their safety or believed the husband was not the baby's father.
Luttig has voted to uphold abortion regulations, including a Virginia parental-notification law. But he also wrote in a 2000 case that a Supreme Court decision upholding a woman's constitutional right to an abortion was "super-stare decisis."
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.