Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SiouxPal who wrote (54195)	1/7/2006 9:28:51 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362423

ScAlito Hearings Start Monday January 9 by Armando Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 05:00:21 PM PDT On Monday, January 9, 2006, one of the most critical events of the year will commence -- the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the confirmation of 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Judge Alito would replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who announced her retirement from the Court, effective on the day her successor is confirmed by the Senate. The Judiciary Committee hearings will almost certainly decide the fate of the Alito nomination. He has many questions to answer and issues to clarify. Tomorrow we will explore these issues in depth. How he manages these questions and issues before the Judiciary Committee will be the most important part of this process. But today, let's look at the political lay of the land on the ScAlito nomination. Surprisingly for me, Sheryl Gay Stolberg of the New York Times writes a good story on the subject for tomorrow's paper, with one notable exception on polling, which she inaccurately describes as showing a majority of Americans favoring Alito's confirmation. The most recent polling on Alito was done by the Wall Street Journal in early January -- MYDD provided the results: [T]he Wall Street Journal . . . poll found 34% in favor of, 31% opposed to, 34% unsure about Alito's confirmation -- an even split all around. The Journal poll did find some serious opposition to Alito on one front though. A hefty 69% would oppose Alito's confirmation if he "would vote to make abortions illegal." That actually mirrors the findings of the Post poll, in which 61% said they would want Alito to uphold Roe v Wade. While Stolberg mischaracterized the polling on Alito, she did do a good job of describing where the politics are right now. On the filibuster: The Democrats, hoping to pick up seats in this year's midterm elections, have almost as much at stake as the nominee himself. They are under intense pressure from liberal advocacy groups to oppose Judge Alito, and they are acutely aware that if he is confirmed to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a critical swing vote, he could tilt American jurisprudence in a more conservative direction for decades. . . . Senator Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat and a member of the Judiciary Committee, said there was a consensus among Democrats that although "it's hard to block a nominee, blocking this nominee is a possibility." But Mr. Schumer said no decision would be made until the hearings were over. "Because he has had some very strong statements, he is under an obligation to accept or refute those," Mr. Schumer said, "and if he just tries to avoid them, the assumption will be made that he still believes them. That puts him in a difficult position. "On the other hand, blocking a nominee is a big deal. So who knows? Everyone's waiting." On the significant change caused by the Bush NSA Illegal Surveillance scandal: The hearings before the 18-member Judiciary Committee - 10 Republicans and 8 Democrats - will unfold against a political landscape that is vastly changed since last fall, when Chief Justice Roberts was confirmed by a Senate vote of 78 to 22. Washington today is consumed with the revelation that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans, and the issue of domestic spying will be a prominent feature of the Alito hearings. . . . A string of Democratic senators, including Mr. Schumer, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Feingold and Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, have signaled their intention to question Judge Alito on the spying issue. They will try to draw a link between the program and a 1984 memo in which Judge Alito, then a lawyer for the Reagan administration, argued that the attorney general should be immune from lawsuits for ordering wiretaps without a court order. "There is no question that the question of executive powers in a time of war, in the context of the terrorist threat, will be central to the Alito hearings," Mr. Feingold said, adding, "I would be surprised if it wasn't one of the most important topics." On that score, Democrats will get a boost from the Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who intends to hold hearings on the domestic spying program and to question Judge Alito about whether Congress should have been informed. dailykos.com