Posted on 01/10/2006 4:14:05 AM PST by OXENinFLA
LOL!
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito so far hasn't earned the outcry from opponents who are hoping to put him on the hook the way failed nominee Robert Bork was in 1987, but neither has the candidate gained the support of any senators sitting on the fence.
With no bombshells dropped through day two of the weeklong confirmation hearing, Democrats who voted against Chief Justice John Roberts in September appear equally dissatisfied with Alito, while Republicans so far seem ready to support the nominee
"Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito is carefully weaving his way through Senate confirmation hearings, saying enough to please his Republican backers while trying not to give Democratic critics any new material to use against his high court nomination."
And Thomas and Scalia joined in a common dissent in Rasul v. Bush, 542 US 466 (2004).
Even though there are only a handful of cases (Hamdi, Hamdan, Rasul, Padilla), I still haven't wrapped my brain around the specific issues each case addressed, and which issues are left rather unsettled. I take Rasul as a narrow finding of habeas corpus jurisdiction (under 28 USC 2241) of US Article III Courts over 1) alien prisoners, 2) held at Gitmo. Scalia & Thomas (& Rhenquist) dissenting said "no, and it's up to Congress to adjust 2241." It is the Rasul case that provoked Lindsey Graham's introduction of S.AMND.2516 - modified to S.AMND.2524, on November 14, 2005.
A good number of FReepers howled in derision at Graham's audacity! LOL.
Graham can rehabilitate himself with the base by marrying Laura Ingraham
Thanks for the info. It's a lot. I hope to get a chance to look over all of it, sometime.
bttt
totally agree, saveliberty, totally agree.
:-)
Thanks for the information. I agree Judge Alito has responded well. I got a chuckle over his "That's a way of buying 30 seconds" response. One needs a little time to figure out what Lindsey is trying to get at.
The Tenth Amendment? Oh I get it, your talking astronomy. That explains everything.
bump.
What ever reigns in their arrogance and makes them answerable to someone or one's who have authority over them.
Are you series??
I thought Chuckie Schmuckie didn't believe in torture?
Except for R's. Not for murderers, thieves, rapists, terrorists or the Clintons. But I repeat myself
No you don't.
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.