Posted on 10/31/2005 5:13:05 AM PST by Hadean
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid issued the following statement regarding the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court.
"The nomination of Judge Alito requires an especially long hard look by the Senate because of what happened last week to Harriet Miers. Conservative activists forced Miers to withdraw from consideration for this same Supreme Court seat because she was not radical enough for them. Now the Senate needs to find out if the man replacing Miers is too radical for the American people.
"I am disappointed in this choice for several reasons. First, unlike previous nominations, this one was not the product of consultation with Senate Democrats. Last Friday, Senator Leahy and I wrote to President Bush urging him to work with us to find a consensus nominee. The President has rejected that approach.
"Second, this appointment ignores the value of diverse backgrounds and perspectives on the Supreme Court. The President has chosen a man to replace Sandra Day OConnor, one of only two women on the Court. For the third time, he has declined to make history by nominating the first Hispanic to the Court. And he has chosen yet another federal appellate judge to join a court that already has eight justices with that narrow background. President Bush would leave the Supreme Court looking less like America and more like an old boys club.
"Justice OConnor has been the deciding vote in key cases protecting individual rights and freedoms on a narrowly divided Court. The stakes in selecting her replacement are high.
"I look forward to meeting Judge Alito and learning why those who want to pack the Court with judicial activists are so much more enthusiastic about him than they were about Harriet Miers.
It was Schumer who all but declared the Miers nomination dead and said she would have more to prove in her confirmation hearing than any other nominee in history, and said he was personally unimpressed with her. Schumer is hardly a member of the 'conservative activists.'
We have our replacement line finally for "Tom Daschle is Deeply Saddened." "Harry Reid is Disappointed."
Had you actually engaged your brain instead of drinking Kool-Aid, you would have seen that my comment was a shot at the Miers supporters. I have said on many threads that the constitution delineates no specific qualifications. Bush could have nominated a plumber for all I care. If the guy can demonstrate that he has a conservative philosophy, I say put him on the Court.
There is no "automatic" winner.
If We the People have chosen to grant a specific power to the federal government, then the federal law applies. However, we have not granted total and absolute power to the federal government, therefore it does not retain authority in all areas of American law.
Of course, I'm speaking idealistically, because the federal government routinely exceeds its Constitutional authority and does whatever it wishes, without regard to the Constitution or the proper role of government.
The Constitution exists as a contract between individual Americans, States, and the people we elect to serve in the federal government.
That does not mean that the federal government can do whatever it wants in any circumstance it chooses.
I believe your understanding of the Supremacy clause is faulty as it ignores other provisions within the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and also stands in direct opposition to the principles of limited government held dear by our founders.
"While federal law takes precedence over state law,"
That is a false statement. Really, the only question to answer is the following when considering a situation where a conflict exists between federal and State law.
Does the Constitution give the federal government the power to regulate, legislate, or involve itself with this issue given these particular circumstances?
If yes, the federal law applies, if not, then the issue is to be dealt with by States or by the People ourselves independent of the will of the federal government.
Sorry. Reid's (Minority Leader) not ours. Frist (Tennessee) is the Majority Leader of the Senate. Although, I'm not particularly impressed with Frist, either.
That's what I meant...Frist needs to learn that Reid "should be" considered irrelevant in his minority status; but for some reason he's unable to get over that little hump.
You lost.
We won.
Bush is the POTUS.
Get over it.
You are stuck on STUPID.
GOOD!
That says that he's the right pick for the job.
For the third time, he has declined to make history by nominating the first Hispanic to the Court.Cloture Motions against ESTRADA in the 108th Congress
Date Nominee Filed By Date Vote Result DEM Aye's for Cloture ------ ------- -------- ------ ----------- --------------------- Jul 28 Miguel A. Estrada Sessions Jul 30 55-43 No.312 F Breaux, Miller, Nelsons (NE/FL) May 06 Miguel A. Estrada McConnell May 08 54-43 No.143 F Breaux, Miller, Nelsons (NE/FL) May 01 Miguel A. Estrada McConnell May 05 52-39 No.140 F Breaux, Nelsons (NE/FL) Mar 31 Miguel A. Estrada Bennett Apr 02 55-44 No.114 F Breaux, Miller, Nelsons (NE/FL) Mar 13 Miguel A. Estrada Frist Mar 18 55-45 No. 56 F Breaux, Miller, Nelsons (NE/FL) Mar 11 Miguel A. Estrada Frist Mar 13 55-42 No. 53 F Breaux, Miller, Nelsons (NE/FL) Mar 04 Miguel A. Estrada Frist Mar 06 55-44 No. 40 F Breaux, Miller, Nelsons (NE/FL)
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.