Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Turley: “There Will Be No One to the Right of Sam Alito on This Court” (Hear, hear!)
Today Show transcript ^ | October 31, 2005 | Jonathon Turley

Posted on 10/31/2005 10:18:38 AM PST by freedomdefender

When Harriet Miers’ nomination was first announced, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley called her an “amazingly bad choice.” This morning, he weighed in Samuel Alito:

JONATHAN TURLEY: He’s the top choice for particularly pro-life people. Sam Alito is viewed as someone who is likely to join the hard right in likely narrowing Roe and possibly voting to overturn Roe.

KATIE COURIC: So he is a strict constructionist in every since of the word? I know President Bush is looking for a conservative jurist, so he fits the bill in terms of someone who will interpret the Constitution literally and may disagree with the right to privacy, which is the foundation of Roe v. Wade?

TURLEY: Oh absolutely. There will be no one to the right of Sam Alito on this Court. This is a pretty hardcore fellow on abortion issues.

COURIC: Not even Antonin Scalia?

TURLEY: They’ll have to make a race to the right, but I think it will be by a nose, if at all. …

COURIC: And ideology trumped gender in this case, right?

TURLEY: I think so. I think the president wanted, first of all, to show he could pick someone who was clearly qualified and has the resume, but he also wanted to rally his base. He’s done both with Sam Alito. No one on the conservative base can be unhappy with Sam Alito. The question is whether they can weather this storm that will be coming, I think, and whether there will be a filibuster.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial
KEYWORDS: alito; jonathanturley; liberalnightmare; miers; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last
To: freedomdefender

Works for me.........my kinda guy.


21 posted on 10/31/2005 10:27:49 AM PST by Dawgreg (Happiness is not having what you want, but wanting what you have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

"By a nose".......IZZAT an Italian joke?.............


22 posted on 10/31/2005 10:27:52 AM PST by Red Badger (Spies are the most important asset, because on them depends an army's ability to march. - SUN TZU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Heatseeker

The Rats have been bluffing all along. There will either be no filibuster or a token one that gets broken quickly. The reason for all the huffing and puffing and threatening from the Rats was to intimidate the President into nominating someone weak and squishy. It was a bluff, and with Alito the President has called their bluff.


23 posted on 10/31/2005 10:28:34 AM PST by puroresu (Conservatism is an observation; Liberalism is an ideology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
Senator Frist is already exploring ways on how to surrender to the democrats on this appointment.

Well now we know how the doom and gloomers are taking this news. Nice way to spin out of a potentially great news day.

24 posted on 10/31/2005 10:28:40 AM PST by Clump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

Turley and al-Khouriq?




Ideology over substance.


25 posted on 10/31/2005 10:28:47 AM PST by Petronski (Cyborg is the greatest blessing I have ever known.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

They got their Ruth, we got our Sam.


26 posted on 10/31/2005 10:29:04 AM PST by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
Senator Frist is already exploring ways on how to surrender to the democrats on this appointment.

As usual, you're the voice of pessimism. You've never heard good news in your life.

27 posted on 10/31/2005 10:29:11 AM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MarcusTulliusCicero
Katie admits that the right to privacy isn't in the Constitution.

Of course the right to privacy is in the Constitution - it's right there in Amendments IX and X. The right to privacy will never be overturned. What will change is the recognition that the developing baby has a right to privacy also.

28 posted on 10/31/2005 10:29:28 AM PST by green iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Dear Kattie:
How else should someone read the constitution other than 'Literally'.

Would you like a person that says its an alegory?


29 posted on 10/31/2005 10:29:45 AM PST by Rhadaghast (Yeshua haMashiach hu Adonai Tsidkenu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender
COURIC: So it could be said that Mr Alito wont make up law from the bench? Hmm... It should be stated that Mr Alito wont be uniting the country then...(aka. Not a flaming liberal judge)"
30 posted on 10/31/2005 10:31:02 AM PST by smith288 (Peace at all cost makes for tyranny free of charge...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender
And ideology trumped gender in this case, right?

Maybe qualfifcations trumped it as well, Katie.

This notion that there are not seats on the court 'reserved' for certain types of people is false and dangerous.

Would Katie agree that 'Thomas's' seat was reserved for another black conservative when he goes? I think not.

31 posted on 10/31/2005 10:33:15 AM PST by CaptRon (Pedecaris alive or Raisuli dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

JRB would have been easier to get through, though I pray Alito is confirmed.


32 posted on 10/31/2005 10:33:31 AM PST by TAdams8591 (It's the Supreme Court, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarcusTulliusCicero
the right to privacy isn't in the Constitution.

Perhaps you are unaware of the 9th amendment. Hard to imagine what an unenumerated right would look like, if not the right of privacy against the government. It's what underlies the right against unreasonable search and seizure.

I agree that Roe v. Wade is bad law, and should be overturned. What makes it particularly egregious is that SCOTUS used the right to privacy as grounds for their decision.

In fact, the right to privacy -- which does exist and must be recognized by government in a free socisty -- is completely irrelevant to the abortion question.

It chills my blood to hear so many conservatives willing to trash our privacy rights, and to take the indefensible position that the only rights we have are the ones enumerated in the Consitution.

33 posted on 10/31/2005 10:34:47 AM PST by Maceman (Fake but accurate -- and now double-sourced)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender
No one on the conservative base can be unhappy with Sam Alito.

I guess Turley doesn't lurk around here much. We have a whole contingent of Fundamentalist identity politics people who would have taken a Fundamentalist moderate with a crappy resume over a Catholic conservative with a great resume.

34 posted on 10/31/2005 10:35:20 AM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
No one is more conservative than my favorite Justice, Clarence Thomas.

I second that emotion

35 posted on 10/31/2005 10:35:26 AM PST by Lekker 1 ("Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?"- Harry M. Warner, Warner Bros., 1927)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Clump

Good news is the pick.... Now the hard part is getting him confirmed and that last I knew that would be up to Senator Frist. Perhaps that has changed?


36 posted on 10/31/2005 10:37:47 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

Scalia to Turley: Come again? Watch your mouth nerdy boy...


37 posted on 10/31/2005 10:41:01 AM PST by The_Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender
Wow, to hear this is a real pick-me-up on a Monday morning!
It makes me feel better all over than anyplace else!!
38 posted on 10/31/2005 10:43:43 AM PST by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

The only value information Katie can impart to conservatives is by WHAT SHE HATES! Judging by this excahange, the leftist MSM's hate campaign will immediately engage at full strength. Bush has done it right this time, let's see if the Republicans in the Senate can measure up.


39 posted on 10/31/2005 10:46:58 AM PST by Spok (Est omnis de civilitate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender
So he is a strict constructionist in every since of the word? I know President Bush is looking for a conservative jurist, so he fits the bill in terms of someone who will interpret the Constitution literally...

Didn't Katie get the memo? There is NO such thing as a "strict constructionist." There are only right-wing activists... Anyone who can't imagine the "penumbras and emenations" in the Constitution must be a right-wing activist...

40 posted on 10/31/2005 10:47:10 AM PST by Onelifetogive (* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some FReepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson