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.

[GeronL]

Jan 9???

Could Bush do a recess appointment??

[dalight]

The lesson to be learned: React defensively to passify MSM, and it will bite you in the a$$ somewhere sometime somehow later on!

This really is so true. Bush knows the measure of the Terrorists and knows when you cave to them, it just gets them fired up. Why doesn't he see that its the same with the Dems and LSM Biggies who are attempting to intimidate him.

[flaglady47]

"Ah yes, I had forgotten the true meaning of incumbency. Thank you for reminding me."

Oh, cut it out. You are being one of those sanctimonious types, and mighty cynical too. I guess you think all politicians, even all of the Pub ones, are just on the take, are privileged and don't work hard. If they don't fundraise and gladhand, they will be out of a job and their constituents will be irritated that they aren't paying any attention to them. Maybe you just don't understand politics and how it works, or maybe you just look on the dark side of everything. Go tell Tom DeLay that he doesn't work hard enough or Tancredo, or Brownback, or a myriad of others. You can be cynical, but I'm not totally gone yet. I still believe there are those that get into politics as service to their country and because they believe in certain principles, at least most of the Pub ones do, and even, I suppose, some Dems.

Go run for office yourself and see how you would do. You fly back and forth week after week between the state you represent and Wash. DC. You go fundraise constantly, eating a thousand rubber chicken dinners and gladhanding everyone, you sit in an office and deal with constituent complaints. You go to all of the meetings, make all of the votes on the floor, be constantly running from one place to another, and at the same time trying to maintain some kind of family life. And you go through all the work involved in running a compaign to stay in office, and waiting it out on election nite to see if you even have a job the next day. You take that risk. And then the politicians have crabby, cranky, cynical, whining, complaining, and snide remark making constituents like yourself to deal with. Yes indeed you don't know the meaning of incumbency, and what is involved in keeping it. You just sit on the sidelines and snipe.

[no dems]

They're delaying it because between now and January, Sandra Day O'Connor will rule on some important cases brought before the SCOTUS (including abortion) per Shepherd Smith on FOX Radio.

[indianrightwinger]

Apparently McPain predicted confirmation....

McCain predicts confirmation

Earlier in the day, the influential group of Senate moderates known as the "Gang of 14" emerged from their first meeting on the nomination with the message that "everyone is reserving judgment on everything," in the words of Sen. Mark Pryor, an Arkansas Democrat. The group -- which earlier this year reached a compromise to head off a showdown over several Bush nominations for the federal courts -- could have tremendous sway over Alito's fate, particularly if Senate Democrats attempt to filibuster the conservative judge. "It's way too early to talk about some of the more divisive things that have been talked about in the past," Sen. Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, said after the meeting, which lasted about 30 minutes. "We're going to let the process unfold, make up our minds as we go along. But nobody's talking about those issues that would break up the gang or cause a rule change or a filibuster," Nelson said. "Some of us are more favorably disposed than others," said Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican who held the meeting. McCain said he is "very favorably disposed" toward Alito, but "it's my obligation to go along with the Gang of 14 and have periodic meetings and discussions." The former presidential candidate later told CNN that he expected Alita to be confirmed. Republican Sens. Mike DeWine of Ohio, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Olympia Snowe of Maine have said they don't see Alito triggering the "extraordinary circumstances" standard the group had set that could initiate a filibuster. "Judge Alito's nomination has been here a week," McCain said. "To make a conclusion before even one hearing is held is not the way the 14 are going to function, as far as I know."

[Nipplemancer]

just what i wanted on my birthday, senate hearings! Yay!

[Cboldt]

Anyone have a list of cases/issues the Court has to decide by then?

Granted/Noted Cases List(October Term 2005) (HTML)
Supreme Court Calendar(October Term 2005) (PDF)

ARGUMENT CALENDARS (October Term 2005) (PDF)

• Session Beginning October 3, 2005
• Session Beginning October 31, 2005
• Session Beginning November 28, 2005
• Session Beginning January 9, 2006

MERITS BRIEFS - Online
Argument Transcripts

Supreme Court of the United States

[The Red Zone]

They're delaying it because between now and January, Sandra Day O'Connor will rule on some important cases brought before the SCOTUS (including abortion) per Shepherd Smith on FOX Radio.

Can't the Chief Justice hold the whole thing up until Alito is on?

[Cboldt]

I can't remember at the moment what's coming up, but I'm pretty sure there are some votes that conservatives are very interested in.

Besides forward looking, the "cases of interest" includes those cases that O'Connor has heard, but where opinions have not been handed down.

Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: October 2005
Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: November 2005
Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: December 2005
Supreme Court Preview: Briefs: January 2006

---

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England et al
New Hampshire Parental Notification Statute (1st Cir found statute unconstitutional)
Oral Argument Scheduled for November 30, 2005

If the Court agrees with New Hampshire, then states will not have to provide explicit health exceptions in their abortion laws. Further, New Hampshire's death exception will stand in its current state, providing for criminal liability where a physician acts at least negligently in performing an abortion without notification.

liibulletin: Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of N. New England

---

Gonzales et al. v. Oregon et al.
Whether Controlled Substances Act plays in assisted suicide
Oral Argument (transcript linked) was held on October 5, 2005

---

Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc. dba ConAgra Refrigerated Foods
To what extent an appeals court may review sufficiency of evidence supporting a civil verdict where the losing party moved for a judgement as a matter of law, below.
Oral Argument Scheduled for November 2, 2005

Caught my eye based on my opinion that the Sciavo case illuminates a procedural weakness in the Civil Law system, where the remedy requested is death. To the extent upper courts are hamstrung to the finding of facts below, errors in fact finding below can have the consequence of death against the patient's wishes, based on error below with no practical ability to reverse. The Uniterm case is not pertinent because the appellant moved for a decsion below on the grounds that "even if the facts are found as stated by the opposing party, I should win as a matter of law." The better argument in Schiavo is "the fact below [TS wants to die] was wrongly found and because the stakes are life and death, Appeals Courts should modify the standard of review."

---

There are quite a few 4^th Amendment cases in the October-January window. I still haven't found a source that provides a concise summary of the cases and questions presented, where the list is close to being in chronological order.

[Cboldt]

David Espo - The Associated Press
November 4, 2005

The Republican-controlled Senate will begin hearings Jan. 9 on Judge Samuel Alito's appointment to the Supreme Court, leaders of the Judiciary Committee announced Thursday, a bipartisan repudiation of President Bush's call for a final confirmation vote before year's end. ...

Specter said that "lurking below the surface is a concern for a filibuster" and said pushing the start of hearings to January "takes away a principal argument for those who would say the Senate is rushing."

http://www.law.com/jsp/scm/PubArticleSCM.jsp?id=1131012316443

Specter has a point on the "need time for deliberation" angle. The intended function of cloture is to prevent a simple majority of a deliberative body from ramming a decision through before the members have adequate opportunity to reach a reasoned opinion.

The general rule in parliamentary procedure as expressed in Roberts Rules of order is that at least 2/3rds of the body should be prepared to vote (be sufficiently informed) before the vote is taken. Ideally, all members will have reached a reasoned position before the call to vote.

Senate Rule XXII (cloture) is abused when a Senator KNOWS how they will vote (e.g., against the nomination), and still refuses the body of the Senate an opportunity to express its voice. It is dysfunction to take the position, "I know how I am going to vote, but I refuse to let the rest of you vote."

That being said, the DEMs are deliberately dragging their feet on this. The research is already done, and a Senator can easily reach a reasoned position in the next 3 weeks.

[leprechaun9]

The motto of the election industry pimps in the U.S. Senate:

NO JOB IS SO IMPORTANT THAT IT CAN'T WAIT!

(Old expression from Scottish Law!)

[Graymatter]

Sounds good to me, heleny, but I guess the senators need the extra time to run their flea combs over his very considerable paper trail.

[Cboldt]

More Case summaries ...

---

Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights ("FAIR")
Oral Argument Scheduled for December 6, 2005

The Solomon Amendment, 10 U.S.C. 983(b)(1), withholds specified federal funds from institutions of higher education that deny military recruiters the same access to campuses and students that they provide to other employers. The question presented is whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the Solomon Amendment's equal access condition on federal funding likely violates the First Amendment to the Constitution and in directing a preliminary injunction to be issued against its enforcement.

Did the Court of Appeals err in ruling that the Solomon Amendment's equal access condition on federal funding violates the First Amendment based on the fact that the Solomon Amendment burdens the right of educational institutions to engage in expressive association and forces law schools to propagate a message of discrimination against homosexuals with which they disagree?

http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/04-1152.html

---

Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal
Oral Argument Conducted November 1, 2005

The O Centro case reached the Supreme Court in an appeal from a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of drug law against the Uniao Do Vegetal sect for its herbal tea sacrament. ... If that concern spreads among the Court's members, it is conceivable that the case might be returned to lower courts, for a full trial as the sect sought a permanent injunction to allow its use of [hallucinogenic] hoasca tea. http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2005/11/herbal_tea_case.html

---

Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph
Oral Argument Scheduled for November 8, 2005

Should this Court grant certiorari to resolve the conflict among federal and state courts on whether an occupant may give law enforcement valid consent to search the common areas of the premises shared with another, even though the other occupant is present and objects to the search?

http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/docket/2005/november.html

---

Ahhh!!! I found a source for all the cases on the docket, where the summary includes summaries of the issues presented.

Supreme Court Docket October 2005
Supreme Court Docket November 2005
Supreme Court Docket December 2005

[Ramcat]

Toomey

Casey?

[mjwise]

flaglady,

I know a half-dozen people personally who work harder, don't know if they'll have a job the next DAY, and get none of the glory that Congressmen get.

If you're trying to make me feel sorry for them, it's not working. They are servants of the people, and yes, it's a hard job, but it's many times more luxurious than what a lot of people have to do to get by. Family life? At least the Senate doesn't have third shift.

And they get job security for 2 to 6 years a pop, and given how non-competitive races have become in most districts, it's likely longer than that. And frankly, I'm disappointed with both my senators ("Gang of 14" DeWine and "Crying Eyes" Voinovich) both of whom have barely had to lift a finger to get re-elected the past few years. My district rep (Boehner, R-OH) is generally good.

Bottom line: Hard job, yes, but gloriously sacrificing and heroics-inducing job? Not quite!

[StarFan]

Other than providing DEMS with more time to try to dig up bad stuff on Alito, is this delay a big deal?

It is to O'Connor and to our President who asked for a speedy process. It's the minority's party way of thumbing their nose at GWB with the aid of Specter.

[xzins]

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?

Get it done.

[BnBlFlag]

Why not next Monday Nov.7, 2005. The Pubbies have absolutely no sense of urgency about anything. They don't call us the "Stupid Party" for nothing and it looks like we're "Stuck There".

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Bush deserves this. He supported Spector in the primary over a true conservative and now he gets screwed by Spector on a regular basis.

[TeleStraightShooter]

I agree with the main part of the post except this part:

The Democrats are united in withholding a decision on Alito (including a decision on whether to participate in a filibuster against the nomination) until the hearings start.

IIRC, many of the Right To Take Life Senators have already declared opposition.

Since Ben Nelson (D-Nb) is a pro-life from a pro-life state, I don't see how a PR scare scares him.

I see 63 votes to confirm.