Poll to FReep (Alito)

Houston Comical ^

[The_Victor]

Should Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito be confirmed by the Senate?

Yes! Finally, a conservative majority!: 10%
Yes, he has a fine legal mind: 13%
Not sure. I'm eager to learn more in hearings: 6%
No, there are too many questions about his record: 6%
No! He's too far to the right!: 65%

Total Votes: 2010

[The_Eaglet]

Considering he ruled in favor of partial-birth abortion and made other pro-abortion rulings, he's too far to the left.

[The_Eaglet]

This is the link I meant to use, although the other is informative, too.

[Salvation]

Hot link, please?

[The_Victor]

Same as the one in title block. http://www.chron.com/

[The_Victor]

As an appelate court judge under oath to abide by the law and Supreme Court precedent, he would have to uphold Roe v Wade, regardless of how he feels about the original ruling.

[The_Eaglet]

What oath bound them to Supreme Court Precedent?

The Fifth Amendment is still supreme over any precedent. Striking down the PBA ban was not right. It was wrong.

[The_Victor]

I agree that the RvW ruling is wrong but the oath to uphold the rule of law binds them to precedent.

[Iwo Jima]

Done.

[The_Eaglet]

Precedent is not law as the Constitution does not give courts legislative powers (see Article 1 Section 1 and Amendment X)

[DurtySanches]

[img]http://www.chron.com/[/img]

[The_Victor]

The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution sets the precedent and to lower courts it is the Constitution. Only the Supreme Court can overturn it's own rulings, and a federal court judge would be in violation of his oath to do otherwise.

[DurtySanches]

Disregard my post, guess it didn't work, But i did stay at a holiday in Express.

[The_Eaglet]

What oath binds them to treat previous court decisions as law even though the Constitution never gave courts legislative authority?

[The_Victor]

What oath binds them to treat previous court decisions as law even though the Constitution never gave courts legislative authority?

The oath to uphold the law. I will not hold an appellate court judge responsible for upholding a USSC decision. The lower courts have no choice. If you think the appellate court judge should break his oath then you're no better that the USSC justices that provided the bad ruling in the first place.

[The_Eaglet]

Where does the Constitution give appelate courts legislative authority?

[The_Victor]

Upholding his oath and ruling according to the law as set by USSC precedent, is not exercising legislative authority, even if the USSC legislated from the bench in the original decision. Your premise is hogwash.

[cbkaty]

Yes! Finally, a conservative majority!:
20%
Yes, he has a fine legal mind:
25%
Not sure. I'm eager to learn more in hearings:
8%
No, there are too many questions about his record:
8%
No! He's too far to the right!:
39%

[Preachin']

These polls are pointless.

The only one that matters is the one the US Senate will have on the floor.

[The_Victor]

The only one that matters is the one the US Senate will have on the floor.

But it's so much fun to watch the numbers move to a conservative bend, knowing that the leftists are screaming at their computers.

[Preachin']

"But it's so much fun to watch the numbers move to a conservative bend, knowing that the leftists are screaming at their computers."

It's hardly worth voting 2,000 time in an irrelevant poll for the sole purpose of making someone you don't even know squirm.

What a complete waste of time.