Posted on 01/17/2006 1:06:18 PM PST by SmithL
SUPREME Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. was careful to avoid being too revealing at his Senate confirmation hearings, but he did answer the overriding question.
He is the wrong choice to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the nation's highest court.
In some ways, Alito's taciturn approach to questions about the great constitutional issues of our time was similar to that of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. But the distinction between the history of the two judges -- and the role of the justice they were nominated to replace -- are important.
Of the two, Alito had far more explaining to do about his past, and his answers fell short of satisfying concerns about his record of advocating repeal of Roe vs. Wade, highlighting his membership in a Princeton alumni group with retrograde views of women and minorities and all too frequently siding with government and businesses against individuals seeking redress.
One of the focal points in the Alito hearings was the balance of power between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. That issue was not only timely because of the Bush administration's attempts to usurp the authority of Congress, but also because of Alito's past support for the concept of a "unitary executive" with extensive powers. In fact, as a Justice Department lawyer in the Reagan administration, Alito laid out a strategy for presidents to "increase the power of the executive to shape the law" by putting caveats with their signature on legislation. President Bush has been doing just that -- using "signing statements" more than 100 times to essentially reserve his right to ignore a law he might find unduly constraining. For example, in recently signing the torture ban, Bush included language that could allow him to override it for national security purposes.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
SF Chronicle - Too bad for you...
blah blah blah.....GIVE US A LIBERAL....blah blah blah
If these guys dont like him...he must be the right choice.
Wrong choice for a liberal President.
"Why The San Fransisco Chronicle Is Useful Only For Bird Cages"
Wrong choice for Than Franthithco.
Right choice for America.
Choke on it, libs.
These are the same people that actively campaigned for a liberal Pope.
"the great constitutional issues of our time"
"May we still murder babies, huh, can we?"
You could read that through a full body condom?
If the editors of the San Francisco Chronicle were in a position to cast a vote for or against confirmation, I might give a crap what their opinion is.
Thanks for the laugh.
Is that the SF Pravda?
San Francisco Chronicle - The Cheese Stands Alone
The San Francisco Comical whines again.
It must REALLY hurt to be a Democrat right about now.
Then get your own guys/girls elected you bunch of heterophobes (SF Chronicle)
Ah, no.
Didn't slick Willy put through about 1500 executive orders in the last few days of his term???
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.